From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/10] bql: Byte Queue Limits Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 15:29:46 +0100 Message-ID: <1322576986.2465.10.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC> References: <1322550138.2970.70.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1322576645.7454.48.camel@deadeye> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Dave Taht , Tom Herbert , davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Ben Hutchings Return-path: Received: from mail-qy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.216.174]:60748 "EHLO mail-qy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755685Ab1K2O3v (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Nov 2011 09:29:51 -0500 Received: by qyk4 with SMTP id 4so1607282qyk.19 for ; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 06:29:50 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1322576645.7454.48.camel@deadeye> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Le mardi 29 novembre 2011 =C3=A0 14:24 +0000, Ben Hutchings a =C3=A9cri= t : > Not if you separate hardware queues by priority (and your high priori= ty > packets are non-TCP or PuSHed). I mostly have tg3 , bnx2 cards, mono queues... I presume Dave, working on small Wifi/ADSL routers have same kind of hardware.