From: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc: Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com>, Fugang Duan <fugang.duan@nxp.com>,
Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Troy Kisky <troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Simone <cjb.sw.nospam@gmail.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
kernel@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: Alignment issues with freescale FEC driver
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 22:22:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160923202214.kvnmvkc7abi5oj23@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160923183725.GC1041@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>
Hello Russell,
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 07:37:25PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 11:26:18AM -0700, Eric Nelson wrote:
> > So the question is: should we just live with this and acknowledge a
> > performance penalty of bad alignment or do something about it?
>
> Well, I've no interest in trying to do anything with the FEC driver
> anymore, as I'll just generate another big patch stack which won't
> make it into the kernel in a timely fashion - my last attempt at
> improving the FEC driver was dogged with conflicting changes and I
> gave up with it in the end. I ended up spending a full cycle
> rebasing, re-testing, and re-evaluating their performance only to find
> that I'd missed the merge window again, and other conflicting changes
> got merged which meant that I had to start from the beginning again.
I'm not included in the set of people who are responsible to review and
merge fec patches, but I'd be surprised if you couldn't get an exclusive
lock for that driver. Something like: After 4.X-rc1 the fec isn't
touched any more until you got your series ready for the 4.X+1 merge
window. Of course some fixes might have to go in, but these hopefully
won't disturb much.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de (Uwe Kleine-König)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Alignment issues with freescale FEC driver
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 22:22:14 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160923202214.kvnmvkc7abi5oj23@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160923183725.GC1041@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>
Hello Russell,
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 07:37:25PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 11:26:18AM -0700, Eric Nelson wrote:
> > So the question is: should we just live with this and acknowledge a
> > performance penalty of bad alignment or do something about it?
>
> Well, I've no interest in trying to do anything with the FEC driver
> anymore, as I'll just generate another big patch stack which won't
> make it into the kernel in a timely fashion - my last attempt at
> improving the FEC driver was dogged with conflicting changes and I
> gave up with it in the end. I ended up spending a full cycle
> rebasing, re-testing, and re-evaluating their performance only to find
> that I'd missed the merge window again, and other conflicting changes
> got merged which meant that I had to start from the beginning again.
I'm not included in the set of people who are responsible to review and
merge fec patches, but I'd be surprised if you couldn't get an exclusive
lock for that driver. Something like: After 4.X-rc1 the fec isn't
touched any more until you got your series ready for the 4.X+1 merge
window. Of course some fixes might have to go in, but these hopefully
won't disturb much.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K?nig |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-23 20:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-23 16:43 Alignment issues with freescale FEC driver Eric Nelson
2016-09-23 16:43 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-23 16:54 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-09-23 16:54 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-09-23 17:19 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-23 17:19 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-23 17:33 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-23 17:33 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-23 18:13 ` Andrew Lunn
2016-09-23 18:13 ` Andrew Lunn
2016-09-23 18:30 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-09-23 18:30 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-09-23 18:39 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-23 18:39 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-23 18:35 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-23 18:35 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-24 2:45 ` David Miller
2016-09-24 2:45 ` David Miller
2016-09-24 5:13 ` Andy Duan
2016-09-24 5:13 ` Andy Duan
2016-09-24 14:42 ` [PATCH 0/3] net: fec: updates to align IP header Eric Nelson
2016-09-24 14:42 ` [PATCH 1/3] net: fec: remove QUIRK_HAS_RACC from i.mx25 Eric Nelson
2016-09-24 14:42 ` [PATCH 2/3] net: fec: remove QUIRK_HAS_RACC from i.mx27 Eric Nelson
2016-09-24 14:42 ` [PATCH 3/3] net: fec: align IP header in hardware Eric Nelson
2016-09-26 9:26 ` David Laight
2016-09-26 18:39 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-28 16:42 ` David Laight
2016-09-28 17:14 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-28 17:25 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-09-28 18:01 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-29 11:07 ` David Laight
2016-09-30 13:27 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-30 13:49 ` David Laight
2016-09-30 14:16 ` Eric Nelson
2016-10-01 19:52 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-10-03 16:42 ` David Laight
2016-10-03 18:48 ` Eric Nelson
2016-10-08 2:44 ` Andy Duan
2016-09-24 15:09 ` [PATCH 0/3] net: fec: updates to align IP header Andy Duan
2016-09-24 15:29 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-27 11:40 ` David Miller
2016-09-24 2:43 ` Alignment issues with freescale FEC driver David Miller
2016-09-24 2:43 ` David Miller
2016-09-24 12:27 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-24 12:27 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-23 17:37 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-09-23 17:37 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-09-23 18:26 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-23 18:26 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-23 18:37 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-09-23 18:37 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-09-23 18:49 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-23 18:49 ` Eric Nelson
2016-09-23 20:22 ` Uwe Kleine-König [this message]
2016-09-23 20:22 ` Uwe Kleine-König
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=20160923202214.kvnmvkc7abi5oj23@pengutronix.de \
--to=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
--cc=cjb.sw.nospam@gmail.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=eric@nelint.com \
--cc=fugang.duan@nxp.com \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=otavio@ossystems.com.br \
--cc=troy.kisky@boundarydevices.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.