From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: gypsy <gypsy@iswest.com>
Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2005 04:58:03 +0000
Subject: Re: [LARTC] [PATCH] mark in u32
Message-Id: <41DF685B.2B595FB@iswest.com>
List-Id: <lartc.vger.kernel.org>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0501051151270.8614@webhosting.rdsbv.ro>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0501051151270.8614@webhosting.rdsbv.ro>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: lartc@vger.kernel.org

gypsy wrote:
> 
> Thomas Graf wrote:
> >
> 
> > Would you guys like to see esfq included in mainline?
> 
> YES!!
> 
> gypsy

Thomas,

Let me rephrase that.

I can't think of any reason that SFQ should be maintained without the E
<grin>.  It makes very little sense to hard code parameters that the
user might wish or need to supply.  That's the reason for ESFQ.  When no
parameters are given, it _is_ SFQ; when there are parameters it complies
with ones wishes.

Name it what you like, but SFQ desperately needs to accept paramters,
and ESFQ should be the only SFQ.

gypsy
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/