lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2020 16:19:17 -0800 From: Andre Guedes <andre.guedes@...ux.intel.com> To: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com>, Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com> Cc: Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>, David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> Subject: RE: [PATCH iproute2-next] taprio: Add support for the SetAndHold and SetAndRelease commands Hi Jose, Quoting Jose Abreu (2019-12-18 15:08:45) > From: Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com> > Date: Dec/18/2019, 23:05:13 (UTC+00:00) > > > However, I feel that this is incomplete. At least the way I understand > > things, without specifying which traffic classes are going to be > > preemptible (or it's dual concept, express), I don't see how this is > > going to be used in practice. Or does the hardware have a default > > configuration, that all traffic classes are preemptible, for example. > > > > What am I missing here? > > On our IPs Queue 0 is by preemptible and all remaining ones are express > by default. Is this configuration fixed in your IP or the user can control if a specific queue is preemptible or express? I'm trying to figure out how this discussion relates to the Qbu discussion we're having in "[v1,net-next, 1/2] ethtool: add setting frame preemption of traffic classes". Regards, Andre
Powered by blists - more mailing lists