From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] net: mvpp2: use the same buffer pool for all ports Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 13:41:48 +0100 Message-ID: <20180305134148.3bbba514@windsurf.home> References: <20180302154044.25204-1-antoine.tenart@bootlin.com> <20180302154044.25204-2-antoine.tenart@bootlin.com> <20180302170159.258bcdbc@windsurf.lan> <20180305104813.GI1156@kwain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: davem@davemloft.net, Stefan Chulski , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com, gregory.clement@bootlin.com, miquel.raynal@bootlin.com, nadavh@marvell.com, ymarkman@marvell.com, mw@semihalf.com To: Antoine Tenart Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180305104813.GI1156@kwain> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Hello, On Mon, 5 Mar 2018 11:48:13 +0100, Antoine Tenart wrote: > > > +static void mvpp2_setup_bm_pool(void) > > > +{ > > > + /* Short pool */ > > > + mvpp2_pools[MVPP2_BM_SHORT].buf_num = MVPP2_BM_SHORT_BUF_NUM; > > > + mvpp2_pools[MVPP2_BM_SHORT].pkt_size = MVPP2_BM_SHORT_PKT_SIZE; > > > + > > > + /* Long pool */ > > > + mvpp2_pools[MVPP2_BM_LONG].buf_num = MVPP2_BM_LONG_BUF_NUM; > > > + mvpp2_pools[MVPP2_BM_LONG].pkt_size = MVPP2_BM_LONG_PKT_SIZE; > > > +} > > > > ? > > I wanted to do this, but it's no possible as MVPP2_BM_SHORT_PKT_SIZE and > MVPP2_BM_LONG_PKT_SIZE use a core definition which expands at some point > to __max(...) which has to be called from within a function. Hum, weird: #define MVPP2_BM_LONG_PKT_SIZE MVPP2_RX_MAX_PKT_SIZE(MVPP2_BM_LONG_FRAME_SIZE) #define MVPP2_BM_LONG_FRAME_SIZE 2048 #define MVPP2_RX_MAX_PKT_SIZE(total_size) \ ((total_size) - NET_SKB_PAD - MVPP2_SKB_SHINFO_SIZE) #define MVPP2_SKB_SHINFO_SIZE \ SKB_DATA_ALIGN(sizeof(struct skb_shared_info)) #define SKB_DATA_ALIGN(X) ALIGN(X, SMP_CACHE_BYTES) I don't really see a __max(...) call. And if this value really expands depending on other values, then it isn't really a constant, and should be considered as a constant, no? Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://bootlin.com