From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Lunn Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: fec: select queue depending on VLAN priority Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 14:15:12 +0200 Message-ID: <20170509121512.GA16665@lunn.ch> References: <20170509053708.2573-1-stefan@agner.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: fugang.duan@nxp.com, festevam@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Stefan Agner Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170509053708.2573-1-stefan@agner.ch> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 10:37:08PM -0700, Stefan Agner wrote: > Since the addition of the multi queue code with commit 59d0f7465644 > ("net: fec: init multi queue date structure") the queue selection > has been handelt by the default transmit queue selection > implementation which tries to evenly distribute the traffic across > all available queues. This selection presumes that the queues are > using an equal priority, however, the queues 1 and 2 are actually > of higher priority (the classification of the queues is enabled in > fec_enet_enable_ring). > > This can lead to net scheduler warnings and continuous TX ring > dumps when exercising the system with iperf. > > Use only queue 0 for all common traffic (no VLAN and P802.1p > priority 0 and 1) and route level 2-7 through queue 1 and 2. Hi Stefan Did you try: vconfig set_egress_map eth0.42 0 7 ip addr add 10.42.42.42/24 eth0.42 iperf -c 10.42.42.1 i.e. send a continuous stream on one of the higher priority queues. >>From what was said earlier in this thread, isn't queue 0 going to be starved? As well as this patch, don't we also need some default bandwidth allocations to the queues to ensure queue 0 does get some bandwidth? Andrew