Hi Andrew,

On 10/05/24 2:09 am, Andrew Lunn wrote:

EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe

On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 01:04:52PM +0000, Parthiban.Veerasooran@microchip.com wrote:

quoted

Hi Andrew,

On 08/05/24 10:34 pm, Andrew Lunn wrote:

quoted

EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe

quoted

Yes. I tried this test. It works as expected.

quoted

     Each LAN8651 received approximately 3Mbps with lot of "Receive buffer
overflow error". I think it is expected as the single SPI master has to
serve both LAN8651 at the same time and both LAN8651 will be receiving
10Mbps on each.

Thanks for testing this.

This also shows the "Receive buffer overflow error" needs to go away.
Either we don't care at all, and should not enable the interrupt, or
we do care and should increment a counter.

Thanks for your comments. I think, I would go for your 2nd proposal
because having "Receive buffer overflow error" enabled will indicate the
cause of the poor performance.

Already we have,
tc6->netdev->stats.rx_dropped++;
to increment the rx dropped counter in case of receive buffer overflow.

May be we can remove the print,
net_err_ratelimited("%s: Receive buffer overflow error\n",
tc6->netdev->name);
as it might lead to additional poor performance by adding some delay.

Could you please provide your opinion on this?

This is your code. Ideally you should decide. I will only add review
comments if i think it is wrong. Any can decide between any correct
option.

Sure, thanks for your advice. Let me stick with the above proposal until 
I get any others opinion.

Best regards,
Parthiban V

         Andrew