From: Ganesh Venkatesan <ganesh.venkatesan@gmail.com>
To: "Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@osdl.org>
Cc: Malli Chilakala <mallikarjuna.chilakala@intel.com>,
jgarzik@pobox.com, netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-drivers-2.6 5/6] e100: Performance optimizations to e100 Tx Path
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 09:51:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5fc59ff305042109514b792bbf@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050420200524.3e284eb9.rddunlap@osdl.org>
On 4/20/05, Randy.Dunlap <rddunlap@osdl.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 22:50:31 -0700 (PDT) Malli Chilakala wrote:
>
> |
> | -#define E100_WAIT_SCB_TIMEOUT 40
> | +#define E100_WAIT_SCB_TIMEOUT 20000 /* we might have to wait 100ms!!! */
>
> What correlation is there between 20000 and 100 ms ?
>
This needs some review and fixing on our side.
> | static inline int e100_exec_cmd(struct nic *nic, u8 cmd, dma_addr_t dma_addr)
> | {
> | unsigned long flags;
> | @@ -847,6 +847,10 @@ static inline int e100_exec_cb(struct ni
> | * because the controller is too busy, so
> | * let's just queue the command and try again
> | * when another command is scheduled. */
> | + if(err == -ENOSPC) {
> if (err == -ENOSPC) {
> is preferred (with space after if).
> (same comment for below)
Is there a clear directive on 'if(' versus 'if ('? I see both styles
being used. We are trying to stay consistent with 'if('.
>
> | + //request a reset
> Kernel comment style is /* ... */, not //.
> (same comment for below)
>
Agreed. Will fix this.
> | + schedule_work(&nic->tx_timeout_task);
> | + }
> | break;
> | } else {
> | nic->cuc_cmd = cuc_resume;
> | @@ -1289,12 +1294,15 @@ static inline void e100_xmit_prepare(str
> | struct sk_buff *skb)
> | {
> | cb->command = nic->tx_command;
> | + /* interrupt every 16 packets regardless of delay */
> | + if((nic->cbs_avail & ~15) == nic->cbs_avail) cb->command |= cb_i;
> Don't put if() and statement on one line, please.
> It tends to hide code unintentionally.
Will fix this.
>
> | cb->u.tcb.tbd_array = cb->dma_addr + offsetof(struct cb, u.tcb.tbd);
> | cb->u.tcb.tcb_byte_count = 0;
> | cb->u.tcb.threshold = nic->tx_threshold;
> | cb->u.tcb.tbd_count = 1;
> | cb->u.tcb.tbd.buf_addr = cpu_to_le32(pci_map_single(nic->pdev,
> | skb->data, skb->len, PCI_DMA_TODEVICE));
> | + // check for mapping failure?
> | cb->u.tcb.tbd.size = cpu_to_le16(skb->len);
> | }
>
> ---
> ~Randy
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-04-21 16:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-20 5:50 [PATCH net-drivers-2.6 5/6] e100: Performance optimizations to e100 Tx Path Malli Chilakala
2005-04-21 3:05 ` Randy.Dunlap
2005-04-21 16:51 ` Ganesh Venkatesan [this message]
2005-04-21 17:10 ` Randy.Dunlap
2005-04-21 16:55 ` Scott Feldman
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-04-21 18:59 Brandeburg, Jesse
2005-04-21 19:17 ` Scott Feldman
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=5fc59ff305042109514b792bbf@mail.gmail.com \
--to=ganesh.venkatesan@gmail.com \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=mallikarjuna.chilakala@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=rddunlap@osdl.org \
/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).