[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e53ac28b-c896-4f8d-a8b0-371f92c4ad5a@lunn.ch>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2023 23:45:17 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Graeme Smecher <gsmecher@...eespeedlogic.com>
Cc: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>,
Shay Agroskin <shayagr@...zon.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>,
Marek Majtyka <alardam@...il.com>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: ti/cpsw_new: Expose the same module parameters as
ti/cpsw.
On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 02:13:21PM -0700, Graeme Smecher wrote:
> The "old" CPSW driver (cpsw.c) exports the following module parameters:
>
> - ti_cpsw.debug_level
> - ti_cpsw.ale_ageout
> - ti_cpsw.rx_packet_max
> - ti_cpsw.descs_pool_size
>
> This patch exposes the same parameters for the "new" CPSW driver:
>
> - ti_cpsw_new.debug_level
> - ti_cpsw_new.ale_ageout
> - ti_cpsw_new.rx_packet_max
> - ti_cpsw_new.descs_pool_size
>
> It seems like consistency between the two drivers is a reasonable goal.
The new driver was written because the old driver had a lot of bad
practices. module parameters are bad practices, there are better APIs
to use. So that is why they are not present.
ethtool has an API to set debug_level. descs_pool_size sounds a lot
like ethtool --set-ring. I don't know what the other two do, but look
to see if ethtool has an option to set them.
Andrew
---
pw-bot: cr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists