netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 05/15] net/sched: taprio: give higher priority to higher TCs in software dequeue mode

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <875ycndoyc.fsf@kurt>
Date:   Tue, 31 Jan 2023 10:37:47 +0100
From:   Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 05/15] net/sched: taprio: give higher
 priority to higher TCs in software dequeue mode

On Sun Jan 29 2023, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> Anyway, I also need to be very realistic about what's possible for me to
> change and how far I'm willing to go, and Vinicius made it pretty clear
> that the existing taprio/mqprio configurations should be kept "working"
> (given an arbitrary definition of "working"). So things like adding UAPI
> for TXQ feature detection, such that an automated way of constructing
> the mqprio queue configuration, would be interesting but practically
> useless, since existing setups don't use that.
>
> He proposed to cut our losses and use the capability structure to
> conditionally keep that code in place. The resulting taprio code would
> be pretty horrible, but it might be doable.
>
> Here is a completely untested patch below, which is intended to replace
> this one. Feedback for the approach appreciated.

Yeah, I think Vinicius has to ack or nack this.

Thanks,
Kurt

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (862 bytes)