[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180112014009.09524ba4@laptop>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 01:40:09 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kubakici@...pl>
To: Nogah Frankel <nogahf@...lanox.com>
Cc: Yuval Mintz <yuvalm@...lanox.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Ido Schimmel" <idosch@...lanox.com>, mlxsw <mlxsw@...lanox.com>,
"jhs@...atatu.com" <jhs@...atatu.com>,
"xiyou.wangcong@...il.com" <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 5/5] mlxsw: spectrum: qdiscs: Support stats for
PRIO qdisc
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 09:29:22 +0000 Nogah Frankel wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Yuval Mintz
> > Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 10:47 AM
> > To: Jakub Kicinski <kubakici@...pl>
> > Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>; netdev@...r.kernel.org; Nogah
> > Frankel <nogahf@...lanox.com>; davem@...emloft.net; Ido Schimmel
> > <idosch@...lanox.com>; mlxsw <mlxsw@...lanox.com>; jhs@...atatu.com;
> > xiyou.wangcong@...il.com
> > Subject: RE: [patch net-next 5/5] mlxsw: spectrum: qdiscs: Support
> > stats for PRIO qdisc
> > > > > Hm. You you need this just because you didn't add the backlog
> > > > > pointer to destroy? AFAIK on destroy we are free to reset
> > > > > stats as well, thus simplifying your driver... Let me know
> > > > > if I misunderstand.
>
> The problem of doing it in destroy is when one qdisc is replacing
> another. I want to be able to destroy the old qdisc to "make room"
> for the new one before I get the destroy command for the old qdisc
> (that will come just after the replace command for the new qdisc).
> If I am saying that the destroy changes the stats, I need to save
> some data about the old qdisc till I get the destroy command for it.
Agreed, maintaining a coherent destroy behavior would be problematic
when successful replace with a new qdisc (e.g. different handle) is
involved :(
Besides the momentary stats seem to be reset before destroy so not
touching them may be in fact more correct. I need to look into the
propagation done in qdisc_tree_reduce_backlog(), it worries me. If
we start stacking the qdiscs (e.g. red on top of prio) it could mess
with the root's backlog...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists