[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+h21hpS9YYDwv0JzmA5BBSanV+w2jvyZdtFqYt=GL+hEc=ufA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 21:46:34 +0100
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Robert Beckett <bob.beckett@...labora.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] dt-bindings: mv88e6xxx: add ability to set default
queue priorities per port
Hi guys,
On 10/09/2019, Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> On Tue, 10 Sep 2019 09:42:24 -0700, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
> wrote:
>> This is a vendor specific driver/property,
>> marvell,default-queue-priority (which be cheapskate on words) would be
>> more readable. But still, I have some more fundamental issues with the
>> general approach, see my response in the cover letter.
>
> As Florian said, the DT is unlikely to welcome vendor specific nodes for
> configuration which may be generic through standard network userspace
> tools.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Vivien
>
While I do agree that the DT bindings are a big no-no for QoS
settings, the topic is interesting.
What is the user space knob for configuring port-default priority (say
RX queue)?
Something like this maybe? (a very forced "matchall" with rxnfc)
ethtool --config-nfc eth0 flow-type ether src 00:00:00:00:00:00 m
00:00:00:00:00:00 action 5
Regards,
-Vladimir
Powered by blists - more mailing lists