From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hagen Paul Pfeifer Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] netem: rate-latency extension Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 13:02:18 +0100 Message-ID: <20111125120218.GB2810@hell> References: <1322156378-23257-1-git-send-email-hagen@jauu.net> <1322172898.2872.7.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20111124210926.3e4b7567@s6510.linuxnetplumber.net> <1322201600.2872.15.camel@edumazet-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Stephen Hemminger , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from alternativer.internetendpunkt.de ([88.198.24.89]:50892 "EHLO geheimer.internetendpunkt.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754276Ab1KYMCU (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Nov 2011 07:02:20 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1322201600.2872.15.camel@edumazet-laptop> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: * Eric Dumazet | 2011-11-25 07:13:20 [+0100]: >Yes, but Hagen change adds a few lines to netem, and netem already >handles throttling. This is why I believe its a nice enhancement. We first modified TBF, but TBF address a slightly different task. So the patch was a little bit awkward and complex (more awkward then the two additional netem enqueue() lines). So in the end: yes, netem is the right place for this: only a few lines in netem are required. Additionally: setup a qdisc chain with TBF, netem, ... is also error prone. Students of mine repeatedly make mistakes here. This change make a complete emulation setup even more easy. But this is only a side note. Hagen