[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1803230948210.4625@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 09:49:54 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Jesus Sanchez-Palencia <jesus.sanchez-palencia@...el.com>
cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, jhs@...atatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
jiri@...nulli.us, vinicius.gomes@...el.com,
richardcochran@...il.com, anna-maria@...utronix.de,
henrik@...tad.us, john.stultz@...aro.org, levi.pearson@...man.com,
edumazet@...gle.com, willemb@...gle.com, mlichvar@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v3 net-next 13/18] net/sched: Introduce the TBS Qdisc
On Thu, 22 Mar 2018, Jesus Sanchez-Palencia wrote:
> On 03/22/2018 03:11 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> So, are you just opposing to the case where sorting off + offload off is used?
> (i.e. the scheduled FIFO case)
FIFO does not make any sense if your packets have a fixed transmission
time. I yet have to see a reasonable explanation why FIFO in the context of
time ordered would be a good thing.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists