From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jamal Subject: Re: [PATCH] NET: Multiqueue network device support. Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 07:50:31 -0400 Message-ID: <1181044231.4075.51.camel@localhost> References: <20070604214037.1524.58506.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20070604214045.1524.18254.stgit@localhost.localdomain> Reply-To: hadi@cyberus.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, jeff@garzik.org, auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com To: PJ Waskiewicz Return-path: Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.177]:19378 "EHLO py-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754715AbXFELui (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2007 07:50:38 -0400 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id a29so2819931pyi for ; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 04:50:38 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20070604214045.1524.18254.stgit@localhost.localdomain> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2007-04-06 at 14:40 -0700, PJ Waskiewicz wrote: > API added to support multiple hardware queues on an ethernet device. > Round-robin scheduler added (sch_rr) to provide a no-scheduling policy > qdisc for hardware with multiple queues. > >>From a high level i see a good start that you at least have a separate qdisc. I dont see the need for making any subqueue semantics in the qdisc. We already have them. I also still dont see the need for the patching of the prio qdisc or the subqueue control. I am now uncertain that after all those discussions (and a lot other private ones) whether you understood me. We are still not meeting in the middle. Sorry, Peter i dont mean to rain on your parade but i cant let this just slide by[1]. So please give me sometime and this week i will send patches to demonstrate my view. I didnt mean to do that, but as i see it i have no other choice. BTW, wheres the e1000 change? cheers, jamal [1] If for example you wrote a classifier or a qdisc (as in a recent discussion I had with Patrick) i would say it is your code and your effort and i have the choice not to use it (by virtue of there being other alternatives). I have no such luxury but to use the changes you make to that code path whenever i use multi tx rings. PS:- It is polite to CC someone who has engaged you in a conversation; in particular as i have told you before at times i dont read netdev for days but read emails addressed to me even when busyed out or travelling.