All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Simon Huelck <simonmail@gmx.de>
To: Jose Abreu <jose.abreu@synopsys.com>,
	Sebastian Gottschall <s.gottschall@newmedia-net.de>,
	Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>,
	Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
Cc: linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org, Gpeppe.cavallaro@st.com,
	alexandre.torgue@st.com,
	Emiliano Ingrassia <ingrassia@epigenesys.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: stmmac / meson8b-dwmac
Date: Sat, 11 May 2019 16:53:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2d7a5c80-3134-ebc0-3c44-9ca9900eade8@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2c4d9726-6c2a-cd95-0493-323f5f09e14a@synopsys.com>

Hi guys,

on 5.1+ the story keeps being the same.

950 Mbits in each direction, but when in duplex RX is starving to ~70
MBits..

ethtool -S gave me some counts for mmc_rx_fifo_overflow, which i didnt
recognize before.


Do we have new ideas / new direction to dig for ?


regards,
Simon

Am 01.03.2019 um 10:23 schrieb Jose Abreu:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On 2/27/2019 7:02 PM, Simon Huelck wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> the thing is , that im not a stmmac developer. Yes , maybe i can bissect
>> it and yes you are lucky since im a C-developer since a long time for
>> embedded systems.
>>
>> The problem is that i dont understand the structure of stmmac and im not
>> aware of any documentation about the driver structure nor the underlying
>> ethernet hardware ( even though im used to ethernet hardware in embedded
>> environment ). So how shall i recognize the relevant change between
>> 4.14.29 and 5.0rc8 ?
>>
>>
>> Is it in the DTS/DTB, wrong hardware description ? Is it in the code ?
>> how is the duplex hardware working on this piece ?
>>
>> I can try to support you the best i can, but i have little chances to
>> analyze it myself. At which measurements / counters is it possible to
>> see that duplex is fully working ?  Why did even the non-duplex
>> bandwidth regress from 900MBits to 650 ? Why is that 650 MBits dividing
>> up to TX and RX in summary when doing duplex ? Why is TX not starving in
>> duplex but RX ?
>>
>> From my point of view should be the following things given:
>> - the non duplex bandwidth should be somewhere around 900MBits , the HW
>> is capable of that
>> - TX should not influence RX or vice versa in duplex
>> - the duplex bandwidth should be 900MBits in both directions ( maybe a
>> bit asymetric when buffers in both dirs are not same )
>>
>> I guess we need some profiling on stmmac and ( at least i need ) more
>> knowledge of the hardware and stmmac itself. Can someone point me to the
>> driver documentation, describing the functions in the code and the
>> structure ? How can i profile stmmac ( usually im using hardware / JTAG
>> debuggers at work, but here @home i got nothing like that )
>>
>> So how do we continue ?
> When I said bissect I was meaning GIT Bissect [1]. You shouldn't
> need any development background for this. You just have to start
> bissect, compile, test and check if commit is good or not.
>
> I'm not very familiar with this feature but I think you can
> bissect pretty fast if you say you just want stmmac commits,
> check ("Cutting down bisection by giving more parameters to
> bisect start") on previous link ... In your case it would be
> stmmac changes, dts, and phy.
>
> [1] https://git-scm.com/docs/git-bisect
>
> Thanks,
> Jose Miguel Abreu



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Simon Huelck <simonmail@gmx.de>
To: Jose Abreu <jose.abreu@synopsys.com>,
	Sebastian Gottschall <s.gottschall@newmedia-net.de>,
	Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>,
	Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
Cc: linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	alexandre.torgue@st.com,
	Emiliano Ingrassia <ingrassia@epigenesys.com>,
	Gpeppe.cavallaro@st.com
Subject: Re: stmmac / meson8b-dwmac
Date: Sat, 11 May 2019 16:53:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2d7a5c80-3134-ebc0-3c44-9ca9900eade8@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2c4d9726-6c2a-cd95-0493-323f5f09e14a@synopsys.com>

Hi guys,

on 5.1+ the story keeps being the same.

950 Mbits in each direction, but when in duplex RX is starving to ~70
MBits..

ethtool -S gave me some counts for mmc_rx_fifo_overflow, which i didnt
recognize before.


Do we have new ideas / new direction to dig for ?


regards,
Simon

Am 01.03.2019 um 10:23 schrieb Jose Abreu:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On 2/27/2019 7:02 PM, Simon Huelck wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> the thing is , that im not a stmmac developer. Yes , maybe i can bissect
>> it and yes you are lucky since im a C-developer since a long time for
>> embedded systems.
>>
>> The problem is that i dont understand the structure of stmmac and im not
>> aware of any documentation about the driver structure nor the underlying
>> ethernet hardware ( even though im used to ethernet hardware in embedded
>> environment ). So how shall i recognize the relevant change between
>> 4.14.29 and 5.0rc8 ?
>>
>>
>> Is it in the DTS/DTB, wrong hardware description ? Is it in the code ?
>> how is the duplex hardware working on this piece ?
>>
>> I can try to support you the best i can, but i have little chances to
>> analyze it myself. At which measurements / counters is it possible to
>> see that duplex is fully working ?  Why did even the non-duplex
>> bandwidth regress from 900MBits to 650 ? Why is that 650 MBits dividing
>> up to TX and RX in summary when doing duplex ? Why is TX not starving in
>> duplex but RX ?
>>
>> From my point of view should be the following things given:
>> - the non duplex bandwidth should be somewhere around 900MBits , the HW
>> is capable of that
>> - TX should not influence RX or vice versa in duplex
>> - the duplex bandwidth should be 900MBits in both directions ( maybe a
>> bit asymetric when buffers in both dirs are not same )
>>
>> I guess we need some profiling on stmmac and ( at least i need ) more
>> knowledge of the hardware and stmmac itself. Can someone point me to the
>> driver documentation, describing the functions in the code and the
>> structure ? How can i profile stmmac ( usually im using hardware / JTAG
>> debuggers at work, but here @home i got nothing like that )
>>
>> So how do we continue ?
> When I said bissect I was meaning GIT Bissect [1]. You shouldn't
> need any development background for this. You just have to start
> bissect, compile, test and check if commit is good or not.
>
> I'm not very familiar with this feature but I think you can
> bissect pretty fast if you say you just want stmmac commits,
> check ("Cutting down bisection by giving more parameters to
> bisect start") on previous link ... In your case it would be
> stmmac changes, dts, and phy.
>
> [1] https://git-scm.com/docs/git-bisect
>
> Thanks,
> Jose Miguel Abreu



_______________________________________________
linux-amlogic mailing list
linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-amlogic

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-05-11 14:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 96+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <a38e643c-ed9f-c306-cc95-84f70ebc1f10@gmx.de>
     [not found] ` <CAFBinCDebPOsmrhSXecx48nGWHh7g_OGPbr1Y0M+n_v9Ht91ew@mail.gmail.com>
2019-01-17 21:23   ` stmmac / meson8b-dwmac Simon Huelck
2019-01-17 21:23     ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-04 14:34     ` Martin Blumenstingl
2019-02-04 14:34       ` Martin Blumenstingl
2019-02-06 10:36       ` Emiliano Ingrassia
2019-02-06 10:36         ` Emiliano Ingrassia
2019-02-06 18:04         ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-06 18:04           ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-06 21:21         ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-06 21:21           ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-07 19:30         ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-07 19:30           ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-09  1:09           ` Martin Blumenstingl
2019-02-09  1:09             ` Martin Blumenstingl
2019-02-11 13:44             ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-11 13:44               ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-14  7:21               ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-14  7:21                 ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-17 14:48               ` Martin Blumenstingl
2019-02-17 14:48                 ` Martin Blumenstingl
2019-02-17 19:13                 ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-17 19:13                   ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-18  8:42                 ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18  8:42                   ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18  8:45                   ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18  8:45                     ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18 12:33                     ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-18 12:33                       ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-18 12:41                       ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18 12:41                         ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18 13:02                         ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18 13:02                           ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18 15:29                           ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-18 15:29                             ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-18 15:31                             ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18 15:31                               ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18 15:53                               ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-18 15:53                                 ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-18 16:26                                 ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18 16:26                                   ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18 16:40                                   ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-18 16:40                                     ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-18 16:43                                     ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18 16:43                                       ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18 16:51                                       ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-18 16:51                                         ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-18 17:05                                         ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18 17:05                                           ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-18 18:05                                           ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-18 18:05                                             ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-19  8:47                                             ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-19  8:47                                               ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-19 19:41                                               ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-19 19:41                                                 ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-21 14:21                                                 ` Jerome Brunet
2019-02-21 14:21                                                   ` Jerome Brunet
2019-02-21 17:27                                                   ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-21 17:27                                                     ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-21 17:46                                                     ` Jerome Brunet
2019-02-21 17:46                                                       ` Jerome Brunet
2019-02-21 19:34                                                       ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-21 19:34                                                         ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-22 17:21                                                         ` Anand Moon
2019-02-22 17:21                                                           ` Anand Moon
2019-02-24 15:00                                                       ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-24 15:00                                                         ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-24 15:02                                                         ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-24 15:02                                                           ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-24 19:42                                                         ` Sebastian Gottschall
2019-02-24 19:42                                                           ` Sebastian Gottschall
2019-02-24 20:34                                                           ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-24 20:34                                                             ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-27 11:09                                                             ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-27 11:09                                                               ` Jose Abreu
2019-02-27 19:02                                                               ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-27 19:02                                                                 ` Simon Huelck
2019-03-01  9:23                                                                 ` Jose Abreu
2019-03-01  9:23                                                                   ` Jose Abreu
2019-03-05  9:55                                                                   ` Simon Huelck
2019-03-05  9:55                                                                     ` Simon Huelck
2019-03-06 11:35                                                                     ` Simon Huelck
2019-03-06 11:35                                                                       ` Simon Huelck
2019-03-06 11:45                                                                       ` Simon Huelck
2019-03-06 11:45                                                                         ` Simon Huelck
2019-05-11 14:53                                                                   ` Simon Huelck [this message]
2019-05-11 14:53                                                                     ` Simon Huelck
2019-05-13  9:07                                                                     ` Jose Abreu
2019-05-13  9:07                                                                       ` Jose Abreu
2019-05-22 12:48                                                                       ` Simon Huelck
2019-05-22 12:48                                                                         ` Simon Huelck
2019-05-22 14:02                                                                       ` Neil Armstrong
2019-05-22 14:02                                                                         ` Neil Armstrong
2019-02-27 21:03                                                               ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-27 21:03                                                                 ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-18 17:05                                       ` Simon Huelck
2019-02-18 17:05                                         ` Simon Huelck

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=2d7a5c80-3134-ebc0-3c44-9ca9900eade8@gmx.de \
    --to=simonmail@gmx.de \
    --cc=Gpeppe.cavallaro@st.com \
    --cc=alexandre.torgue@st.com \
    --cc=ingrassia@epigenesys.com \
    --cc=jbrunet@baylibre.com \
    --cc=jose.abreu@synopsys.com \
    --cc=linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=s.gottschall@newmedia-net.de \
    /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.