[LARTC] Internal Qdisc

[LARTC] Internal Qdisc

[R Harper]

Hell
I'm new to Qdisc programming and I was wondering, what is the difference 
between using an internal Qdisc (like e.g. TBF does) vs. not using internal 
Qdisc (like e.g. SFQ does)?

Can someone give me a quick rundown of pro and cons?

with regards
R.harper

_________________________________________________________________
Undgå pop-ups med MSN Toolbar -  http://toolbar.msn.dk hent den gratis!

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

Re: [LARTC] Internal Qdisc

[Leo]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252", Size: 978 bytes --]

Hi

TBF provides traffic shaping by the Token Bucket theory, while SFQ makes
sure(actually just hints) swap packets in different sessions so that no
particular session will hang around for a long time.

Leo

R Harper wrote:
> Hell
> I'm new to Qdisc programming and I was wondering, what is the difference
> between using an internal Qdisc (like e.g. TBF does) vs. not using
> internal Qdisc (like e.g. SFQ does)?
> 
> Can someone give me a quick rundown of pro and cons?
> 
> with regards
> R.harper
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Undg\x7f pop-ups med MSN Toolbar -  http://toolbar.msn.dk hent den gratis!
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LARTC mailing list
> LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
> http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
> 
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

Re: [LARTC] Internal Qdisc

[R Harper]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252", Size: 1562 bytes --]

>TBF provides traffic shaping by the Token Bucket theory, while SFQ makes
>sure(actually just hints) swap packets in different sessions so that no
>particular session will hang around for a long time.

Yes I know the difference between TBF and SFQ.

I was trying to ask about the programming/architectural difference between 
creating a *internal Qdisc* for buffering (like TBF does) and then using
q->qdisc->enqueue(skb, q->qdisc) etc. commands for queueing ...

or just use the qdisc "provided"?
__skb_enqueue(skb, skq->q)  etc commands for queueing....

But thanks for your reply

Regards
R.Harper


>R Harper wrote:
> > Hell
> > I'm new to Qdisc programming and I was wondering, what is the difference
> > between using an internal Qdisc (like e.g. TBF does) vs. not using
> > internal Qdisc (like e.g. SFQ does)?
> >
> > Can someone give me a quick rundown of pro and cons?
> >
> > with regards
> > R.harper
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Undg\x7f pop-ups med MSN Toolbar -  http://toolbar.msn.dk hent den gratis!
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > LARTC mailing list
> > LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
> > http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc
> >

_________________________________________________________________
Få alle de nye og sjove ikoner med MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.dk/

_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc

Re: [LARTC] Internal Qdisc

[Patrick McHardy]

R Harper wrote:
>> TBF provides traffic shaping by the Token Bucket theory, while SFQ makes
>> sure(actually just hints) swap packets in different sessions so that no
>> particular session will hang around for a long time.
> 
> 
> Yes I know the difference between TBF and SFQ.
> 
> I was trying to ask about the programming/architectural difference 
> between creating a *internal Qdisc* for buffering (like TBF does) and 
> then using
> q->qdisc->enqueue(skb, q->qdisc) etc. commands for queueing ...
> 
> or just use the qdisc "provided"?
> __skb_enqueue(skb, skq->q)  etc commands for queueing....

Internal qdiscs don't show up in dev->qdisc_list and thus are invisible
to ip qdisc show. They're usually used as place-holder leaf qdiscs
until the user configures a different one. SFQ doesn't use them to
fit all internal queues in one page.

Regards
Patrick
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list
LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lartc