lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Jul]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH 03/10] dpaa_eth: add configurable bpool thresholds
Date
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Miller [mailto:davem@davemloft.net]
> Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 2:35 AM
> To: Bucur Madalin-Cristian-B32716
> Cc: joe@perches.com; netdev@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-
> dev@lists.ozlabs.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Wood Scott-B07421;
> Liberman Igal-B31950; ppc@mindchasers.com; pebolle@tiscali.nl;
> joakim.tjernlund@transmode.se
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] dpaa_eth: add configurable bpool thresholds
>
> From: Madalin-Cristian Bucur <madalin.bucur@freescale.com>
> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 15:49:39 +0000
>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Joe Perches [mailto:joe@perches.com]
> >> On Wed, 2015-07-22 at 19:16 +0300, Madalin Bucur wrote:
> >> > Allow the user to tweak the refill threshold and the total number
> >> > of buffers in the buffer pool. The provided values are for one CPU.
> >>
> >> Any value in making these module parameters instead?
> >
> > I expect one would (hardly ever) change these to improve some corner
> > cases then use them with the new values. It may help in the tuning process
> > but afterwards the bloat to the bootcmd would probably be a nuisance.
>
> I think these should be controlled by the existing ethtool infrastructure.
>
> Neither the Kconfig mechanism nor module parameters are appropriate, at
> all.

The existing ethtool options are for ring based drivers (ethtool -g / -G).
I would not use those as we are not using rings (they do not map well anyway).

We could introduce special options for our non-ring devices but for these
parameters in particular I'd just resort to defines in the code as it's
improbable one would want to change them.

Madalin


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-07-27 15:21    [W:0.099 / U:0.200 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site