[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <157853218801.36295.5868678705134050101@aguedesl-mac01.jf.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2020 17:09:48 -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,
> > > 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?
>
> It's configurable for all Queues except 0 which is fixed as preemptible.
Thanks for the clarification.
> > 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".
>
> Hmmm.
>
> I think tc utility is the right way to do this, and not ethtool because
> EST and FP are highly tied ... Do you agree ?
I'm still wrapping my head around this :) See my last reply on that other
thread. (BTW, let's concentrate this 'Qbu enabling' discussion there)
Thanks,
Andre
Powered by blists - more mailing lists