netdev - Re: [PATCH] NET: DCB generic netlink interface

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]

Message-Id: <20080605.074324.38999631.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 05 Jun 2008 07:43:24 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com
Cc:	jeff@...zik.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NET: DCB generic netlink interface

From: "Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 23:23:00 -0700

> I'm not sure I follow this.  DCB is a scheduling policy, but that
> scheduling policy is in the hardware.  The configuration interface,
> which is what this is, happens out of band of any scheduling policies in
> the kernel.  It's very analogous to the wireless configuration layer for
> mac80211 that uses generic netlink.

And I'm saying we should have a equivalent software scheduler in
the kernel that can implement this if the hardware offloaded version
isn't present.

It overlaps existing functionality to a certain extent, and there is
no real reason for that overlap to exist.  The question is which
(the existing facilities or the new one) subsumes which.
--
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