netdev - RE: [PATCH v2 net-next 0/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Improve indirect addressing performance

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:   Fri, 28 Jan 2022 14:10:09 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Tobias Waldekranz' <tobias@...dekranz.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 net-next 0/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Improve indirect
 addressing performance

From: Tobias Waldekranz
> Sent: 28 January 2022 10:50
> 
> The individual patches have all the details. This work was triggered
> by recent work on a platform that took 16s (sic) to load the mv88e6xxx
> module.
> 
> The first patch gets rid of most of that time by replacing a very long
> delay with a tighter poll loop to wait for the busy bit to clear.
> 
> The second patch shaves off some more time by avoiding redundant
> busy-bit-checks, saving 1 out of 4 MDIO operations for every register
> read/write in the optimal case.

I don't think you should fast-poll for the entire timeout period.
Much better to drop to a usleep_range() after the first 2 (or 3)
reads fail.

Also I presume there is some lock that ensures this is all single threaded?
If you remember the 'busy state' you can defer the 'busy check' after
a write until the next request.
That may well reduce the number of 'double checks' needed.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)