netdev - Re: taprio vs. wireless/mac80211

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20220826170005.79392041@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 26 Aug 2022 17:00:05 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>
Cc:     Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...e.dk>,
        Avi Stern <avraham.stern@...el.com>,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: taprio vs. wireless/mac80211

On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 15:10:36 -0700 Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
> Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> writes:
> 
> > On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 23:50:18 +0200 Johannes Berg wrote:  
> >> Anyone have recommendations what we should do?  
> >
> > Likely lack of sleep or intelligence on my side but I could not grok
> > from the email what the stacking is, and what the goal is.
> >
> > Are you putting taprio inside mac80211, or leaving it at the netdev
> > layer but taking the fq/codel out?  
> 
> My read was that they want to do something with taprio with wireless
> devices and were hit by the current limitation that taprio only supports
> multiqueue interfaces.
> 
> The fq/codel part is that, as far as I know, there's already a fq/codel
> implementation inside mac80211.
> 
> The stacking seems to be that packets would be scheduled by taprio and
> then by the scheduler inside mac80211 (fq/codel based?).

Doesn't adding another layer of non-time-aware queuing after taprio
completely defeat its purpose?  Perhaps I'm revealing my lack of
understanding too much..