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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2020 09:50:21 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, jhs@...atatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, jiri@...nulli.us, m-karicheri2@...com, vladimir.oltean@....com, Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com, po.liu@....com, intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 0/9] ethtool: Add support for frame preemption On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 20:53:16 -0800 Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote: > $ tc qdisc replace dev $IFACE parent root handle 100 taprio \ > num_tc 3 \ > map 2 2 1 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 \ > queues 1@0 1@1 2@2 \ > base-time $BASE_TIME \ > sched-entry S 0f 10000000 \ > preempt 1110 \ > flags 0x2 > > The "preempt" parameter is the only difference, it configures which > queues are marked as preemptible, in this example, queue 0 is marked > as "not preemptible", so it is express, the rest of the four queues > are preemptible. Does it make more sense for the individual queues to be preemptible or not, or is it better controlled at traffic class level? I was looking at patch 2, and 32 queues isn't that many these days.. We either need a larger type there or configure this based on classes.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists