netdev - Re: [RFT net-next] net: stmmac: Rework coalesce timer and fix multi-queue races

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 03 Sep 2018 16:10:16 +0200
From:   Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>
To:     Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>,
        Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFT net-next] net: stmmac: Rework coalesce timer and fix
 multi-queue races

On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 12:47 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
> On 03-09-2018 11:16, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> > No notable change. Rx is fine but Tx:
> > [  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  3.55 MBytes  29.8 Mbits/sec   51   12.7 KBytes
> > 
> > I suppose the problem as something to do with the retries. When doing Tx test
> > alone, we don't have such a things a throughput where we expect it to be.
> 
> Yeah, I just remembered you are not using GMAC4 so it wouldn't
> make a difference. Is your version 3.710? If so please try adding
> the following compatible to your DT bindings "snps,dwmac-3.710".

According to the documentation, it is a 3.70a but I learn (the hard way) not to
trust the documentation too much. Is there anyway to make sure which version we
have. Like a register to read ?

Out of curiosity, I changed the compatible to "snps,dwmac-3.710" anyway. For
some reason, the MDIO bus failed to register with this. Since it is not the
documented version, I did not check why.

> 
> > 
> > By the way, your mailer (and its auto 80 column rule I suppose) made the patch
> > below a bit harder to apply
> 
> Sorry. Next time I will send as attachment.

No worries

> 
> Thanks and Best Regards,
> Jose Miguel Abreu