[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48F73AED.7080109@trash.net>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:00:29 +0200
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] pkt_sched: Add qdisc->ops->peek() implementation.
Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 02:26:33PM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>> Jarek Poplawski wrote:
>>> Add qdisc->ops->peek() implementation for work-conserving qdiscs.
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/sched/sch_multiq.c b/net/sched/sch_multiq.c
>>> index 915f314..155648d 100644
>>> --- a/net/sched/sch_multiq.c
>>> +++ b/net/sched/sch_multiq.c
>> I haven't looked at sch_multiq in detail yet, but isn't it supposed to
>> be used as root qdisc? In that case we wouldn't need a ->peek operation.
>>
>
> It's recommended, but IMHO, could be useful as a child too, especially
> for testing. I've thought if it shouldn't be rather treated as non-work-
> conserving, but I don't think there is a reason for preventing such test
> or other non-optimal usage.
OK, if it works thats fine of course.
>>> diff --git a/net/sched/sch_teql.c b/net/sched/sch_teql.c
>>> index d35ef05..8d7acd8 100644
>>> --- a/net/sched/sch_teql.c
>>> +++ b/net/sched/sch_teql.c
>> teql is also meant to be used as root qdisc. It doesn't seem to enfore
>> it though.
>
> Probably like above: there is not much of this code, but it could be
> cut, no problem.
I'm mainly wondering whether it works at all when not used as a
root qdisc. I'm unable to answer this by a quick look at the code,
so for now I'd just keep that part too.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists