netdev - RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v1] net: mvpp2: divide fifo for dts-active ports only

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: <CO6PR18MB3873F0E32B4EC9565B061995B0FC0@CO6PR18MB3873.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Mon, 23 Nov 2020 17:48:40 +0000
From:   Stefan Chulski <stefanc@...vell.com>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>
CC:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com" <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Nadav Haklai <nadavh@...vell.com>,
        Yan Markman <ymarkman@...vell.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "mw@...ihalf.com" <mw@...ihalf.com>,
        "andrew@...n.ch" <andrew@...n.ch>
Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v1] net: mvpp2: divide fifo for dts-active ports
 only



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>
> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2020 7:30 PM
> To: Stefan Chulski <stefanc@...vell.com>
> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com;
> davem@...emloft.net; Nadav Haklai <nadavh@...vell.com>; Yan Markman
> <ymarkman@...vell.com>; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; kuba@...nel.org;
> mw@...ihalf.com; andrew@...n.ch
> Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v1] net: mvpp2: divide fifo for dts-active ports
> only
> 
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 04:03:00PM +0000, Stefan Chulski wrote:
> > I agree with you. We can use "max-speed" for better FIFO allocations.
> > I plan to upstream more fixes from the "Marvell" devel branch then I can
> prepare this patch.
> > So you OK with this patch and then follow-on improvement?
> 
> Yes - but I would like to see the commit description say that this results in no
> change the situation where all three ports are in use.

Ok, I would repost patch.

Regards.