From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Philip A. Prindeville" Subject: Re: Still using IPTOS_TOS() in kernel? Really??? Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 13:28:34 -0800 Message-ID: <4B2FE882.3080207@redfish-solutions.com> References: <4B298118.2000608@redfish-solutions.com> <200912171724.32711.schmto@hrz.tu-chemnitz.de> <4B2A8A5C.9070702@redfish-solutions.com> <200912212150.34727.schmto@hrz.tu-chemnitz.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Torsten Schmidt Return-path: Received: from mail.redfish-solutions.com ([66.232.79.143]:32845 "EHLO mail.redfish-solutions.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751701AbZLUV2k (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:28:40 -0500 In-Reply-To: <200912212150.34727.schmto@hrz.tu-chemnitz.de> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 12/21/2009 12:50 PM, Torsten Schmidt wrote: > Hi Philip, > > here a second PATCH to add the missing DSCP classes to > ipv4_dscp_stat(), also tested against 2.6.32. > > Next step is to add IN / OUT statistic to DSCP. Maybe > /proc/net/ipdscp will look like: > CS0 in out > CS1 in out > ... > EF in out > > > any comments ? > Torsten Hi Torsten, Yes, the MIB changes are certainly important... we are more focused though on actually updating the default queuing strategies. I'll poke around and see if I can figure out how that works... Looking at include/linux/pkt_sched.h: #define TC_PRIO_BESTEFFORT 0 #define TC_PRIO_FILLER 1 #define TC_PRIO_BULK 2 #define TC_PRIO_INTERACTIVE_BULK 4 #define TC_PRIO_INTERACTIVE 6 #define TC_PRIO_CONTROL 7 it seems that these TC priorities are just random, unrelated buckets and their ordinality has no relation to their priority. Is that correct? If that's the case, then you *can't* just do: static inline char rt_dscp2priority(u8 tos) { return IPTOS_PREC(tos)>>5; } for instance. No, that would be too easy. :-) -Philip