[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130423145222.5b696d0c@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 14:52:22 -0700
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4] rps: selective flow shedding during softnet
overflow
On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 14:37:43 -0700
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-04-23 at 14:23 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>
> > What about just having a smarter ingress qdisc?
>
> What are your ideas ?
>
> Setting ingress qdisc on linux is no fun, and not scalable.
>
> Its ok for playing with netem and low bandwidth.
>
>
I just don't want to get tied down to one hard coded policy.
User seem have different ideas about what constitutes a flow and what policy for drop should be.
Existing ingress qdisc is inflexible and ifb is a pain to setup and adds
another queue transistion.
--
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