From: Jisheng Zhang <Jisheng.Zhang@synaptics.com>
To: <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@bootlin.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Yelena Krivosheev <yelena@marvell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] net: mvneta: some bug fix and trivial improvement
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 16:40:24 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180829164024.41e8439d@xhacker.debian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180829162456.2bd69796@xhacker.debian>
On Wed, 29 Aug 2018 16:25:57 +0800
Jisheng Zhang <Jisheng.Zhang@synaptics.com> wrote:
> patch1 fixes rx_offset_correction set and usage. Because the
> rx_offset_correction is RX packet offset correction for platforms,
> it's not related with SW BM, instead, it's only related with the
> platform's NET_SKB_PAD.
>
> patch2 fixes the wrong function to unmap rx buf
I have question about the following two commits:
7e47fd84b56b ("net: mvneta: Allocate page for the descriptor"), it cause
a waste, for normal 1500 MTU, before this patch we allocate 1920Bytes for rx
after this patch, we always allocate PAGE_SIZE bytes, if PAGE_SIZE=4096, we
waste 53% memory for each rx buf. I'm not sure whether the performance
improvement deserve the pay.
562e2f467e71 ("net: mvneta: Improve the buffer allocation method for SWBM")
mentions that "With system having a small memory (around 256MB), the state
"cannot allocate memory to refill with new buffer" is reach pretty quickly"
is it due to the memory waste as said above? Anyway, by this commit, we
want to improve the situation on a small memory system, so should we firstly
revert commit 7e47fd84b56b ("net: mvneta: Allocate page for the descriptor")?
Any comments are welcome!
Thanks
>
> patch3 removes the NETIF_F_GRO check ourself, because the net subsystem
> will handle it for us.
>
> patch4 enables NETIF_F_RXCSUM by default, since the driver and HW
> supports the feature.
>
> patch5 is a trivial optimization, to reduce smp_processor_id() calling
> in mvneta_tx_done_gbe.
>
> Jisheng Zhang (5):
> net: mvneta: fix rx_offset_correction set and usage
> net: mvneta: fix the wrong function to unmap rx buf
> net: mvneta: Don't check NETIF_F_GRO ourself
> net: mvneta: enable NETIF_F_RXCSUM by default
> net: mvneta: reduce smp_processor_id() calling in mvneta_tx_done_gbe
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvneta.c | 49 ++++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-29 8:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-29 8:25 [PATCH 0/5] net: mvneta: some bug fix and trivial improvement Jisheng Zhang
2018-08-29 8:27 ` [PATCH 1/5] net: mvneta: fix rx_offset_correction set and usage Jisheng Zhang
2018-08-29 9:05 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2018-08-29 9:16 ` Jisheng Zhang
2018-08-29 8:27 ` [PATCH 2/5] net: mvneta: fix the wrong function to unmap rx buf Jisheng Zhang
2018-08-29 9:21 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2018-08-30 3:40 ` Jisheng Zhang
2018-08-29 8:28 ` [PATCH 3/5] net: mvneta: Don't check NETIF_F_GRO ourself Jisheng Zhang
2018-08-29 9:37 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2018-08-29 8:29 ` [PATCH 4/5] net: mvneta: enable NETIF_F_RXCSUM by default Jisheng Zhang
2018-08-29 9:38 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2018-08-29 13:08 ` Andrew Lunn
2018-08-30 3:27 ` Jisheng Zhang
2018-08-30 3:44 ` Andrew Lunn
2018-08-29 8:30 ` [PATCH 5/5] net: mvneta: reduce smp_processor_id() calling in mvneta_tx_done_gbe Jisheng Zhang
2018-08-29 9:44 ` Gregory CLEMENT
2018-08-29 8:40 ` Jisheng Zhang [this message]
2018-08-29 8:51 ` [PATCH 0/5] net: mvneta: some bug fix and trivial improvement Jisheng Zhang
2018-08-30 3:53 ` Jisheng Zhang
2018-08-29 13:12 ` Andrew Lunn
2018-08-30 3:42 ` Jisheng Zhang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180829164024.41e8439d@xhacker.debian \
--to=jisheng.zhang@synaptics.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gregory.clement@bootlin.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
--cc=yelena@marvell.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).