Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] NET: Accurate packet scheduling for ATM/ADSL

From: Patrick McHardy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 17:16:31 +0200

jamal wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-20-06 at 03:04 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> 
>>It would be nice to have support for HFSC as well, which unfortunately
>>needs to be done in the kernel since it doesn't use rate tables.
>>What about qdiscs like SFQ (which uses the packet size in quantum
>>calculations)? I guess it would make sense to use the wire-length
>>there as well.
> 
> 
> Didnt even think of that ;-> 
> Is it getting too complicated? 

The code wouldn't be very complicated, it just adds some overhead. If
you do something like I described in my previous mail the overhead for
people not using it would be an additional pointer test before reading
skb->len. I guess we could also make it a compile time option.
I personally think this is something that really improves our quality
of implementation, after all, its "wire" resources qdiscs are meant
to manage.

> BTW, I forgot to mention one thing on the bandwidth issue is we could do
> is send netlink events on link speed changes too; some listener
> somewhere would then do the adjustment.

See the mail I just wrote :)