From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7448C2D0E4 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 15:31:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3046A2158C for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 15:31:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=armlinux.org.uk header.i=@armlinux.org.uk header.b="plWgy2Sl" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389418AbgKWPan (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Nov 2020 10:30:43 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55610 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732376AbgKWPam (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Nov 2020 10:30:42 -0500 Received: from pandora.armlinux.org.uk (pandora.armlinux.org.uk [IPv6:2001:4d48:ad52:32c8:5054:ff:fe00:142]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EEE6C0613CF; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 07:30:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=armlinux.org.uk; s=pandora-2019; h=Sender:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=T88ZKe8uJpDP//bi76VDlnD7LL64Y2dRzRy+wHD8H90=; b=plWgy2SlcYPlSIKSeWedFsvLB uBM9mEnXVfwhEDyeVpueyEAqdIcYkJN9T0Hc0BkRt79x+dwcP8ARa07cawFAL3WO6u5pOufBonMsa jQ1PFnIEpIsxKmlKFALmzbZiBebfDx73Fj2px0j5p3Ry9Gf/3DyVus511uIm+jaGRJS+XvUvsM0K1 RDRsChKHicICrViWxAOg0OPIETgzaPDD8hO+6pV2NlYEN/dUyXSSfqjqhCZVieKJkaTbKRZUQ9J/U i/Qh1q5TUSoG7JW/4FNEHVgJCYqKIMF4Wzf5LtpvRLCsD3YH6R4n5SmjH+oqlLlh8Bioo7YURaccN 4J7sOlpoA==; Received: from shell.armlinux.org.uk ([fd8f:7570:feb6:1:5054:ff:fe00:4ec]:35112) by pandora.armlinux.org.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1khDnT-00069u-Mm; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 15:30:31 +0000 Received: from linux by shell.armlinux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1khDnQ-0006QK-1B; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 15:30:28 +0000 Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 15:30:28 +0000 From: Russell King - ARM Linux admin To: stefanc@marvell.com Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com, davem@davemloft.net, nadavh@marvell.com, ymarkman@marvell.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kuba@kernel.org, mw@semihalf.com, andrew@lunn.ch Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] net: mvpp2: divide fifo for dts-active ports only Message-ID: <20201123153027.GF1605@shell.armlinux.org.uk> References: <1606143160-25589-1-git-send-email-stefanc@marvell.com> <20201123151049.GV1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201123151049.GV1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: Russell King - ARM Linux admin Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 03:10:49PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 04:52:40PM +0200, stefanc@marvell.com wrote: > > From: Stefan Chulski > > > > Tx/Rx FIFO is a HW resource limited by total size, but shared > > by all ports of same CP110 and impacting port-performance. > > Do not divide the FIFO for ports which are not enabled in DTS, > > so active ports could have more FIFO. > > > > The active port mapping should be done in probe before FIFO-init. > > It would be nice to know what the effect is from this - is it a > small or large boost in performance? > > What is the effect when the ports on a CP110 are configured for > 10G, 1G, and 2.5G in that order, as is the case on the Macchiatobin > board? (dropped Antoine, his email is bouncing.) I've rechecked, and on Macchiatobin, it certainly is: Port 0 = 10G SFP/88x3310 Port 1 = 1G dedicated ethernet Port 2 = 1G/2.5G SFP slot and we do run the SFP slot at 2.5G speeds. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!