From: jamal <hadi@cyberus•ca>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash•net>
Cc: netdev@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC NET_SCHED 00/02]: Flexible SFQ flow classification
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 12:10:01 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1180541401.4109.72.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <465D97F1.9090600@trash.net>
On Wed, 2007-30-05 at 17:27 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> jamal wrote:
> Sure. The thing I don't like about the predefined hash functions is
> that its unflexible.
>
agreed.
> > skb->prio as a selector. I think if you removed that it should be fine.
>
> I don't think thats a problem, it needs to point to the correct major
> to have any effect, which can only happen if it is set by the user.
> I would prefer to keep it for consistency with other qdiscs.
>
> > Another alternative is to create a brand new FQ qdisc and leave the
> > classification to the classifiers.
>
> I created a new classifier to leave classification to the classifiers ..
> Not sure exactly why I would need a new qdisc to do that :)
>
The caveat/difference with current SFQ is you have allowed the user to
define which queue is selected. It is/was dynamically selected based on
packet header now/before. Thats the main reason i said maybe you
separate the two components totaly. i.e while FQ is useful on its own
and can use other classifiers; a useful classifier IMO for SFQ is one
that rips out the sfq_hash or whatever other schemes used in ESFQ into a
classifier (I suppose then the user can select which hash is used). In
such a classifier you can restore the pertub into it.
I am not sure i made sense.
> > I am almost tempted to say go back and write a qdisc called FQ.
>
>
> Funny, last the this came up you suggested to do basically exactly
> what this classifier does, which I thought made sense :)
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg06801.html
I am almost sensing i am contradicting myself in that thread;-> It is
hard to tell and i admit to being forgetful - but what i probably meant
is what i said above.
cheers,
jamal
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-30 16:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-30 9:40 [RFC NET_SCHED 00/02]: Flexible SFQ flow classification Patrick McHardy
2007-05-30 9:40 ` [RFC NET_SCHED 01/02]: sch_sfq: add support for external classifiers Patrick McHardy
2007-05-30 9:40 ` [RFC NET_SCHED 02/02]: Add flow classifier Patrick McHardy
2007-05-30 11:18 ` [RFC NET_SCHED 00/02]: Flexible SFQ flow classification Andy Furniss
2007-05-30 15:32 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-05-30 16:57 ` Andy Furniss
2007-05-30 14:56 ` jamal
2007-05-30 15:27 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-05-30 16:10 ` jamal [this message]
2007-05-30 16:23 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-05-30 16:34 ` jamal
2007-05-30 16:55 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-05-30 17:02 ` jamal
2007-08-09 4:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1180541401.4109.72.camel@localhost \
--to=hadi@cyberus$(echo .)ca \
--cc=kaber@trash$(echo .)net \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox