[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 12:47:49 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: john.fastabend@...il.com
Cc: simon.horman@...ronome.com, yotamg@...lanox.com, jiri@...nulli.us,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, idosch@...lanox.com, eladr@...lanox.com,
nogahf@...lanox.com, ogerlitz@...lanox.com, jhs@...atatu.com,
geert+renesas@...der.be, stephen@...workplumber.org,
xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, linux@...ck-us.net,
roopa@...ulusnetworks.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 5/8] Introduce sample tc action
From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 06:52:31 -0800
> On 16-11-11 04:43 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 08:28:50AM +0000, Yotam Gigi wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> John, as a result of your question I realized that our hardware does do
>>> randomized sampling that I was not aware of. I will use the extensibility of
>>> the API and implement a random keyword, that will be offloaded in our
>>> hardware. Those changes will be sent on v2.
>>>
>>> Eventually, your question was very relevant :) Thanks!
>>
>> Perhaps I am missing the point but why not just make random the default and
>> implement the inverse as an extension if it turns out to be needed in
>> future?
>>
>
> +1 just implement the random one.
Agreed.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists