On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Rick Jones [off-list ref] wrote:
Should anything then happen with:
/* No rx interrupts will be generated if both are zero */
if ((ec->rx_coalesce_usecs == 0) &&
(ec->rx_max_coalesced_frames == 0))
return -EINVAL;
which is the next block of code? The logic there seems to suggest that it
was intended to be able to have an rx_coalesce_usecs of 0 and rely on packet
arrival to trigger an interrupt. Presumably setting rx_max_coalesced_frames
to 1 to disable interrupt coalescing.
I remember writing this block of code over 10 years ago for early
generations of the chip. Newer chips seem to behave differently and
rx_coalesce_usecs can never be zero. So this block can be removed now
that the condition can never be true. We should probably leave a
comment there for future reference.