netdev - RE: [PATCH net-next v2 6/6] enetc: Add adaptive interrupt coalescing

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <DB8PR04MB6764A606445307CD726363F896780@DB8PR04MB6764.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 Jul 2020 08:05:00 +0000
From:   Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next v2 6/6] enetc: Add adaptive interrupt coalescing

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@...il.com>
>Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2020 8:20 PM
[...]
>Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 6/6] enetc: Add adaptive interrupt coalescing
>
>
>On 17.07.2020 22:30, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:37:04 +0300 Claudiu Manoil wrote:
>>> +	if (tx_ictt == ENETC_TXIC_TIMETHR)
>>> +		ic_mode |= ENETC_IC_TX_OPTIMAL;
>>
>> Doesn't seem you ever read/check the ENETC_IC_TX_OPTIMAL flag?
>>
>
>It's used implicitly though ;), as it signals a state change when
>the user changes the default value of the tx time threshold,
>triggering the device recofiguration with the new value. True that
>the said reconfiguration could be also performed in the 'MANUAL' state.
>I added the extra state called 'OPTIMAL' to make the code more easier to
>follow actually. I mean, it's easy to follow that the tx coalescing
>state starts in the "OPTIMAL" mode, w/ the preconfigured "optimal"
>value. Then if the user changes the value, doing some manual tuning of
>tx-usecs, it moves into the 'MANUAL' mode, returning to the 'OPTIMAL'
>mode if the user goes back to the optimal value.
>This handling could also be done in the 'MANUAL' mode alone, so if you
>want me to make this change pls let me know.
>

Removed the 'OPTIMAL' flag, the code looks simpler (fewer lines), and
I'm ok with it.  Updated in v3.