[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c863f88a-65e2-4093-7cc1-f37e4443b871@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2019 17:12:03 +0100
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To: "Leonidas P. Papadakos" <papadakospan@...il.com>,
Jose Abreu <jose.abreu@...opsys.com>
Cc: Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@...obroma-systems.com>,
Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>,
Christoph Müllner
<christoph.muellner@...obroma-systems.com>,
Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Klaus Goger <klaus.goger@...obroma-systems.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] stmmac: introduce flag to dynamically disable TX
offload for rockchip devices
On 03/04/2019 16:55, Leonidas P. Papadakos wrote:
>
>> If snps,no-pbl-x8 does indeed have a performace hit, should the
>> workaround be to
>> a) turn tx checksumming off or
>> b) snps,no-pbl-x8 set?
>>
>> I'll test to see the difference
>
> Update: It really seems like snps,no-pbl-x8 is the better option.
> So I say, replace snps,force_thresh_dma_mode with it.
Yes, I would expect software checksumming to have a much more noticeable
impact (in fact I've already been trying to get round to benchmarking
some arm64 checksum optimisations on my RK3328 precisely because of this
issue).
If I'm interpreting the register descriptions in the Rockchip TRMs
correctly, it seems like no-pbl-x8 is a relatively big hammer and there
should still be room to tune things a bit closer to the maximum limits -
I'll have another play this evening to see if I've understood things right.
Robin.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists