From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754176AbaHUJXM (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Aug 2014 05:23:12 -0400 Received: from 80-229-23-162.plus.com ([80.229.23.162]:48421 "EHLO mail.einon.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753476AbaHUJXK (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Aug 2014 05:23:10 -0400 Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 10:23:05 +0100 From: Mark Einon To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] staging: et131x: Implement NAPI support Message-ID: <20140821092302.GB2230@msilap.einon.net> References: <1408573078-9320-1-git-send-email-mark.einon@gmail.com> <1408573078-9320-9-git-send-email-mark.einon@gmail.com> <20140820202501.558fdb3f@uryu.home.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140820202501.558fdb3f@uryu.home.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 08:25:01PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Wed, 20 Aug 2014 23:17:58 +0100 > Mark Einon wrote: > > > > > + if (budget > MAX_PACKETS_HANDLED) > > + limit = MAX_PACKETS_HANDLED; > > Why this artificial restriction? Hi Stephen, thanks for the review. It's a restriction that was in the original driver code, and I'm being cautious. I don't have much documentation for the device, and I haven't yet figured a way to test the limit so I can play with removing it. If you have any suggestions on how to do that, I'd be happy to hear them. Cheers, Mark From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Einon Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] staging: et131x: Implement NAPI support Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 10:23:05 +0100 Message-ID: <20140821092302.GB2230@msilap.einon.net> References: <1408573078-9320-1-git-send-email-mark.einon@gmail.com> <1408573078-9320-9-git-send-email-mark.einon@gmail.com> <20140820202501.558fdb3f@uryu.home.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140820202501.558fdb3f@uryu.home.lan> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: driverdev-devel-bounces@linuxdriverproject.org Sender: driverdev-devel-bounces@linuxdriverproject.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 08:25:01PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Wed, 20 Aug 2014 23:17:58 +0100 > Mark Einon wrote: > > > > > + if (budget > MAX_PACKETS_HANDLED) > > + limit = MAX_PACKETS_HANDLED; > > Why this artificial restriction? Hi Stephen, thanks for the review. It's a restriction that was in the original driver code, and I'm being cautious. I don't have much documentation for the device, and I haven't yet figured a way to test the limit so I can play with removing it. If you have any suggestions on how to do that, I'd be happy to hear them. Cheers, Mark