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: <5902cc28-a649-4ae9-a5ba-83aa265abaf8@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 20:54:18 +0800
From: "Abdul Rahim, Faizal" <faizal.abdul.rahim@...ux.intel.com>
To: Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>,
 Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Cc: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
 Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
 Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S . Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
 Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
 Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
 Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
 Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
 John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, Furong Xu <0x1207@...il.com>,
 Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
 Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>,
 Xiaolei Wang <xiaolei.wang@...driver.com>,
 Suraj Jaiswal <quic_jsuraj@...cinc.com>,
 Kory Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>, Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>,
 Jesper Nilsson <jesper.nilsson@...s.com>,
 Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@...hat.com>,
 Choong Yong Liang <yong.liang.choong@...ux.intel.com>,
 Kunihiko Hayashi <hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com>,
 Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>,
 intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-next v4 0/9] igc: Add support for Frame Preemption
 feature in IGC



On 13/2/2025 8:01 pm, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote:
> On Thu Feb 13 2025, Abdul Rahim, Faizal wrote:
>> On 13/2/2025 6:01 am, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 02:01:58AM -0500, Faizal Rahim wrote:
>>>> Introduces support for the FPE feature in the IGC driver.
>>>>
>>>> The patches aligns with the upstream FPE API:
>>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/cover/20230220122343.1156614-1-vladimir.oltean@nxp.com/
>>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/cover/20230119122705.73054-1-vladimir.oltean@nxp.com/
>>>>
>>>> It builds upon earlier work:
>>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/cover/20220520011538.1098888-1-vinicius.gomes@intel.com/
>>>>
>>>> The patch series adds the following functionalities to the IGC driver:
>>>> a) Configure FPE using `ethtool --set-mm`.
>>>> b) Display FPE settings via `ethtool --show-mm`.
>>>> c) View FPE statistics using `ethtool --include-statistics --show-mm'.
>>>> e) Enable preemptible/express queue with `fp`:
>>>>      tc qdisc add ... root taprio \
>>>>      fp E E P P
>>>
>>> Any reason why you are only enabling the preemptible traffic classes
>>> with taprio, and not with mqprio as well? I see there will have to be
>>> some work harmonizing igc's existing understanding of ring priorities
>>> with what Kurt did in 9f3297511dae ("igc: Add MQPRIO offload support"),
>>> and I was kind of expecting to see a proposal for that as part of this.
>>>
>>
>> I was planning to enable fpe + mqprio separately since it requires extra
>> effort to explore mqprio with preemptible rings, ring priorities, and
>> testing to ensure it works properly and there are no regressions.
> 
> Well, my idea was to move the current mqprio offload implementation from
> legacy TSN Tx mode to the normal TSN Tx mode. Then, taprio and mqprio
> can share the same code (with or without fpe). I have a draft patch
> ready for that. What do you think about it?
> 
> Thanks,
> Kurt

Hi Kurt,

I’m okay with including it in this series and testing fpe + mqprio, but I’m 
not sure if others might be concerned about adding different functional 
changes in this fpe series.

Hi Vladimir,
Any thoughts on this ?



Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ