All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com>
To: <clabbe.montjoie@gmail.com>, <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
	<Joao.Pinto@synopsys.com>, <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: <peppe.cavallaro@st.com>, <alexandre.torgue@st.com>,
	<f.fainelli@gmail.com>, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Fwd: Re: [v2,net-next,1/3] net: stmmac: enable multiple buffers
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 15:02:27 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <748685e5-86f8-5f6b-66db-04ec96af4bd6@synopsys.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <abf8722f-5d3a-0bae-d6cd-6cc6fbb744cb@synopsys.com>


Sorry, sending again with David Miller in TO: instead of CC.

Às 2:09 PM de 3/24/2017, Corentin Labbe escreveu:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 07:10:59PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 05:27:08PM +0000, Joao Pinto wrote:
>>> Hi Thierry,
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I can submit a patch for that.
>>
>> After some more testing I did get a couple (roughly 2 out of 10)
>> successful boots (I'm booting over NFS using the EQOS), and given that
>> this pointed towards something related to uninitialized data, I changed
>> all occurrences of kmalloc_array() with kcalloc() and that I've gotten
>> 10 successful reboots out of 10.
>>
>> I still can't pinpoint why this is now necessary since previously the
>> kmalloc_array() was working just fine. The only thing I can think of is
>> that we're not properly initializing all fields of the new queue
>> structures, since that's the only thing that's changed with this commit.
>>
>> I haven't investigated in detail yet, but from nothing so far has jumped
>> out at me.
>>
>> Thierry
> 
> I have tried this change, but it made the situation worse on dwmac-sunxi (no network at all).
> 
> Joao, perhaps it's time to revert the faulty (and very huge) patch and rework it by splitting at least in two:
> - adding RX queue / adding TX queue
> And more if possible (like just adding an unused queue parameter) or a patch just for adding stmmac_free_tx_buffers() for example.
> I think it will help to find where the problem is.
> 
> And this time I will test them before applying:)
> 
> Regards
> Corentin Labbe
> 

Yes, I agree, it is better to revert and leave the tree functional for all.

@David Miller:
The multiple-buffer patch introduced some problems in some setups that are being
hard to debug, so Corentin gave the idea of reverting the until
commit 7bac4e1ec3ca2342929a39638d615c6b672c27a0 (net: stmmac: stmmac interrupt
treatment prepared for multiple queues), which I fully agree.

In my setup is ok, but the idea is to have everyone's setup working :), so lets
break them into smaller pieces, and let's only apply them when everyone confirms
that is working ok in your setups, agree?

What is the typical mechanism for this? I send a patch reverting them?

Thanks,
Joao

  reply	other threads:[~2017-03-24 15:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-17 16:11 [PATCH v2 net-next 0/3] net: stmmac: adding multiple buffers and routing Joao Pinto
2017-03-17 16:11 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 1/3] net: stmmac: enable multiple buffers Joao Pinto
2017-03-23 17:17   ` [v2,net-next,1/3] " Thierry Reding
2017-03-23 17:27     ` Joao Pinto
2017-03-23 18:10       ` Thierry Reding
2017-03-24 14:09         ` Corentin Labbe
2017-03-24 14:59           ` Joao Pinto
2017-03-24 15:02             ` Joao Pinto [this message]
2017-03-24 17:17               ` David Miller
2017-03-24 17:19                 ` Joao Pinto
2017-03-24  7:42       ` Andrew Lunn
2017-03-24 10:47         ` Joao Pinto
2017-03-24 11:17           ` Andrew Lunn
2017-03-24 11:21             ` Joao Pinto
2017-03-24 17:05             ` David Miller
2017-03-24 17:09               ` Joao Pinto
2017-03-27  9:28                 ` Alexandre Torgue
2017-03-27  9:34                   ` Joao Pinto
2017-03-17 16:11 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 2/3] net: stmmac: TX and RX queue priority configuration Joao Pinto
2017-03-17 16:11 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 3/3] net: stmmac: RX queue routing configuration Joao Pinto
2017-03-22  0:24 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 0/3] net: stmmac: adding multiple buffers and routing David Miller

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=748685e5-86f8-5f6b-66db-04ec96af4bd6@synopsys.com \
    --to=joao.pinto@synopsys.com \
    --cc=alexandre.torgue@st.com \
    --cc=clabbe.montjoie@gmail.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peppe.cavallaro@st.com \
    --cc=thierry.reding@gmail.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.