From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jamal Subject: Re: [RFC NET_SCHED 00/02]: Flexible SFQ flow classification Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 12:34:57 -0400 Message-ID: <1180542897.4109.81.camel@localhost> References: <20070530094020.24073.84277.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <1180536987.4109.19.camel@localhost> <465D97F1.9090600@trash.net> <1180541401.4109.72.camel@localhost> <465DA4E9.5060906@trash.net> Reply-To: hadi@cyberus.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Patrick McHardy Return-path: Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.233]:14332 "EHLO wr-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751296AbXE3QfA (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2007 12:35:00 -0400 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 76so911438wra for ; Wed, 30 May 2007 09:34:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <465DA4E9.5060906@trash.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2007-30-05 at 18:23 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote: > I think exposing SFQ's queues as classes is a good thing, it allows > you to do whatever classification you want. In fact I'm probably > going to add patch on top to also dump them to userspace. Yes, that would be useful. > What > remains for SFQ to do is serve the queues evenly. And it does (yes, I looked at the patch;->). > My classifier seperates them entirely. The only thing it keeps > in SFQ is the old classifier for compatibility, besides that its > exactly what you say. It should be easily possible to remove it > entirely and use my classifier in a compatible configuration > automatically. > If you removed it entirely (and had it as a separate classifier) IMO that would be a better approach. Then what you have is a pure FQ qdisc. In which case, you leave alone SFQ and have a new qdisc. The "removed" hashing dynamic classifier would of course be better off it allowed the user to select a hash algorithm such as the other ones specified in ESFQ. cheers, jamal