netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 05/12] net: ethernet: oa_tc6: implement error interrupts unmasking

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]

Message-ID: <Zi7IB_uKdFkJLtCS@builder>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 00:04:55 +0200
From: Ramón Nordin Rodriguez <ramon.nordin.rodriguez@...roamp.se>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Parthiban Veerasooran <Parthiban.Veerasooran@...rochip.com>,
	davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
	pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org, saeedm@...dia.com,
	anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, corbet@....net,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
	krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com,
	ruanjinjie@...wei.com, steen.hegelund@...rochip.com,
	vladimir.oltean@....com, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
	Thorsten.Kummermehr@...rochip.com, Pier.Beruto@...emi.com,
	Selvamani.Rajagopal@...emi.com, Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com,
	benjamin.bigler@...nformulastudent.ch
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 05/12] net: ethernet: oa_tc6: implement error
 interrupts unmasking

On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 04:59:40PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > n  |  name     |  min  |  avg  |  max  |  rx dropped  |  samples
> > 1  |  no mod   |  827K |  846K |  891K |      945     |     5
> > 2  |  no log   |  711K |  726K |  744K |      562     |     5
> > 3  |  less irq |  815K |  833K |  846K |      N/A     |     5
> > 4  |  no irq   |  914K |  924K |  931K |      N/A     |     5
> > 5  |  simple   |  857K |  868K |  879K |      615     |     5
> 
> That is odd.
> 
> Side question: What CONFIG_HZ= do you have? 100, 250, 1000?  Try
> 1000. I've seen problems where the driver wants to sleep for a short
> time, but the CONFIG_HZ value limits how short a time it can actually
> sleep. It ends up sleeping much longer than it wants.
> 

Good catch, had it set to 250. I'll rebuild with CONFIG_HZ=1000 and
rerun the tests.