Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-53833-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240202064512.39259-1-liubo03@inspur.com> <20240202085547.46c81c96@xps-13>
In-Reply-To: <20240202085547.46c81c96@xps-13>
From: Alexander Aring <aahringo@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2024 14:42:09 -0500
Message-ID: <CAK-6q+jnZOkSAM8_BQH=CaQhfCQwm0P+segZ+0E6oLeX=BhLHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: ieee802154: at86rf230: convert to use maple tree
 register cache
To: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
Cc: Bo Liu <liubo03@inspur.com>, alex.aring@gmail.com, stefan@datenfreihafen.org, 
	davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, 
	linux-wpan@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 2:56=E2=80=AFAM Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin=
com> wrote:
>
> Hi Bo,
>
> liubo03@inspur.com wrote on Fri, 2 Feb 2024 01:45:12 -0500:
>
> > The maple tree register cache is based on a much more modern data struc=
ture
> > than the rbtree cache and makes optimisation choices which are probably
> > more appropriate for modern systems than those made by the rbtree cache=
.
>
> What are the real intended benefits? Shall we expect any drawbacks?
>

I doubt it has really any benefits, only the slowpath is using regmap
to set some registers. Maybe if you change phy setting frequently it
might have an impact, but this isn't even a path considered to run
fast.

- Alex