netdev - RE: [PATCH] IPROUTE: Modify tc for new PRIO multiqueue behavior

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 3 May 2007 14:03:07 -0700
From:	"Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>
To:	<hadi@...erus.ca>
Cc:	"Patrick McHardy" <kaber@...sh.net>,
	"Stephen Hemminger" <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <jgarzik@...ox.com>,
	"cramerj" <cramerj@...el.com>,
	"Kok, Auke-jan H" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>,
	"Leech, Christopher" <christopher.leech@...el.com>,
	<davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] IPROUTE: Modify tc for new PRIO multiqueue behavior

> Lets come up with some terminology; lets call multiqueue what 
> the qdiscs do; lets call what the NICs do multi-ring.
> Note, i have thus far said you need to have both and they 
> must be in sync.

I agree with the terminology.

> This maybe _the_ main difference we have in opinion.
> Like i said earlier, I used to hold the same thoughts you do.
> And i think you should challenge my assertion that it doesnt 
> matter if you have a single entry point; [my assumptions are 
> back in what i called #b and #c].

Here is a paper that describes what exactly we're trying to do:
http://www.ieee802.org/3/ar/public/0503/wadekar_1_0503.pdf.  Basically
we need the ability to pause a queue independantly of another queue.
Because of this requirement, the kernel needs visibility into the driver
and to have knowledge of and provide control of each queue.  Please note
that the API I'm proposing is a generic representation of the Datacenter
Ethernet mentioned in the paper; I figured if we're putting in an
interface to support it, it should be generic so other technologies out
there could easily use it.

Hopefully that paper can help people understand the motivation why I've
done things the way they are in the patches.  Given this information,
I'd really like to solicit feedback on the patches as they stand (both
approach and implementation).

Cheers,

-PJ Waskiewicz
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html