Hi Wolfgang,
On Friday 26 November 2010 16:13:23 Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > -#define MIN_PACKET_LENGTH 64
> > -#define MAX_PACKET_LENGTH 256
> > +#define MIN_PACKET_LENGTH 256
> > +#define MAX_PACKET_LENGTH (256 + 16)
>
> Maybe it does indeed make sense to test a wider range of package
> sizes. Actually I'd even like to see longer packets tested as well.
>
> How about:
>
> #define MIN_PACKET_LENGTH 64
> #define MAX_PACKET_LENGTH 1518
>
> and changing the
>
> for (l = MIN_PACKET_LENGTH; l <= MAX_PACKET_LENGTH; l++) {
> into
> for (l = MIN_PACKET_LENGTH; l <= MAX_PACKET_LENGTH; l+=91) {
>
> Then you still have 16 tests, but with a much wider range of packet
> sizes (64...1429).
I don't like this "l+=91" statement. How about making it a bit more flexible.
Something like this:
#define MIN_PACKET_LENGTH 64
#define MAX_PACKET_LENGTH 1518
#ifndef CONFIG_SYS_POST_ETH_LOOPS
#define CONFIG_SYS_POST_ETH_LOOPS 10
#endif
#define PACKET_INCR ((MAX_PACKET_LENGTH - MIN_PACKET_LENGTH) / \
CONFIG_SYS_POST_ETH_LOOPS)
and
for (l = MIN_PACKET_LENGTH; l <= MAX_PACKET_LENGTH; l += PACKET_INCR) {
This way, boards could also override the default loop counter. I switched to a
default of 10 this time. This still seems enough for me. Especially with the
longer frames now.
What do you think?
Cheers,
Stefan
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-0 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
