Darek Marcinkiewicz <rek...@newterm.pl> : > On Sat, May 03, 2014 at 01:40:29PM +0200, Francois Romieu wrote: [...] > Thank you. I am attaching 2 of thse to this repsonse - the other two > are no longer relevant due to the changes I made into the driver. > One of the attached patches is slightly modfied by simply having one hunk > removed (that hunk was applying to the code that was removed in next rev > of the driver). Not sure how to proceed with those patches, shall I simply > sent out these patches to this list as a separate messages?
You should submit a complete series if you want them separated - git format-patch does wonders here - or include these directly in your own patch as I don't really care for the credit. [...] > I have changed the code to use much modest value - it is set to be of the > size of the fifo now. I think that this value is much better, but of course > having this configurable would be even better. (see ethtool_ops.[gs]et_ringparam) [...] > No, there is really no interrupt, hence the timer. Also on this device I > wouldn't > expect any bursts of data. What happens here, during regular operation of the > device, is a periodic exchange of (few) ethernet packets between host cpu and > terminals attached to the EtherCAT bus. As for the locking on the tx path, > I have removed that completely on receiving path. I simply didn't know > that it is such a big no-no here :) Ok. Regarding tx_dnext updates, you may add a short notice in ec_bhf_start_xmit and ec_bhf_process_tx explaining that the periodic poller will somehow end working with the right value, whence no (smp_)barrier at all. -- Ueimor -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
