From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Fainelli Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] net: ethernet: mediatek: add dts configuration to enable HW LRO Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 11:24:38 -0700 Message-ID: <3103c7f5-0c67-1ad7-20f5-7722f412c152@gmail.com> References: <1473774866-3156-1-git-send-email-nelson.chang@mediatek.com> <1473774866-3156-4-git-send-email-nelson.chang@mediatek.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: nbd@openwrt.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, nelsonch.tw@gmail.com To: Nelson Chang , john@phrozen.org, davem@davemloft.net Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f193.google.com ([209.85.192.193]:34807 "EHLO mail-pf0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752337AbcIMSYo (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Sep 2016 14:24:44 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f193.google.com with SMTP id g202so9913218pfb.1 for ; Tue, 13 Sep 2016 11:24:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1473774866-3156-4-git-send-email-nelson.chang@mediatek.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 09/13/2016 06:54 AM, Nelson Chang wrote: > Add the configuration of HW LRO in the binding document. > > Signed-off-by: Nelson Chang > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/mediatek-net.txt | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/mediatek-net.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/mediatek-net.txt > index 32eaaca..f43c0d1 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/mediatek-net.txt > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/mediatek-net.txt > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ Required properties: > - mediatek,ethsys: phandle to the syscon node that handles the port setup > - mediatek,pctl: phandle to the syscon node that handles the ports slew rate > and driver current > +- mediatek,hwlro: set to enable HW LRO functions of PDMA rx rings That sounds like implementing a enable/disable policy in the Device Tree as opposed to providing an indication as to whether the HW supports LRO or not. If all versions of the hardware support LRO, then you would rather let the users change NETIF_F_LRO using ethtool features instead of having this be defined in the Device Tree. If, on the other hand, not all version of the HW support LRO, then you would just want to rephrase the property description to say this describes a capability. -- Florian