netdev - Re: [PATCH 20/31]: pkt_sched: Perform bulk of qdisc destruction in RCU.

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:	Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:34:18 +0300
From:	"Tomas Winkler" <tomasw@...il.com>
To:	"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	hadi@...erus.ca, kaber@...sh.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	johannes@...solutions.net, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/31]: pkt_sched: Perform bulk of qdisc destruction in RCU.

On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 8:25 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
> Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 11:16:03 -0400
>
>> IMO, in the case of multiple hardware queues per physical wire,
>> and such a netdevice already has a built-in hardware scheduler (they all
>> seem to have this feature) then if we can feed the hardware queues
>> directly, theres no need for any intermediate buffer(s).
>> In such a case, to compare with qdisc arch, its like the root qdisc is
>> in hardware.
>
> They tend to implement round-robin or some similar fairness algorithm
> amongst the queues, with zero concern about packet priorities.
>
> It really is just like a bunch of queues to the phsyical layer,
> fairly shared.
>
> These things are built for parallelization, not prioritization.

Except wireless where HW has prioritizing scheduler per physical non-wire.
Tomas
--
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