From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Cochran Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 0/5] TSN: Add qdisc-based config interfaces for traffic shapers Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2017 17:53:15 +0200 Message-ID: <20170907155315.5gqy5e4susl25wa2@localhost> References: <20170901012625.14838-1-vinicius.gomes@intel.com> <20170907053411.GA6580@sisyphus.home.austad.us> <20170907124018.deinzo3c4ice3q7n@localhost> <20170907152751.GA9064@sisyphus.home.austad.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Vinicius Costa Gomes , netdev@vger.kernel.org, jhs@mojatatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, jiri@resnulli.us, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, andre.guedes@intel.com, ivan.briano@intel.com, jesus.sanchez-palencia@intel.com, boon.leong.ong@intel.com To: Henrik Austad Return-path: Received: from mail-wr0-f181.google.com ([209.85.128.181]:35774 "EHLO mail-wr0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752200AbdIGPxV (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Sep 2017 11:53:21 -0400 Received: by mail-wr0-f181.google.com with SMTP id m18so261274wrm.2 for ; Thu, 07 Sep 2017 08:53:21 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170907152751.GA9064@sisyphus.home.austad.us> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 05:27:51PM +0200, Henrik Austad wrote: > On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 02:40:18PM +0200, Richard Cochran wrote: > And if you want to this driver to act as a bridge, how do you accomodate > change in network requirements? (i.e. how does this work with switchdev?) To my understanding, this Qdisc idea provides QoS for the host's transmitted traffic, and nothing more. > - Or am I overthinking this? Being able to configure the external ports of a switchdev is probably a nice feature, but that is another story. (But maybe I misunderstood the authors' intent!) > If you have more than 1 application in userspace that wants to send data > using this scheduler, how do you ensure fair transmission of frames? (both > how much bandwidth they use, There are many ways to handle this, and we shouldn't put any of that policy into the kernel. For example, there might be a monolithic application with configurable threads, or an allocation server that grants bandwidth to applications via IPC, or a multiplexing stream server like jack, pulse, etc, and so on... > but also ordering of frames from each application) Not sure what you mean by this. > Do you expect all of this to be handled in userspace? Yes, I do. Thanks, Richard