From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next] net/sched: add skbprio scheduler
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 16:33:36 -0300
Message-ID: <20180711193336.GF8880@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20180707101351.GA8300@gmail.com>
 <20180709154409.GC8880@localhost.localdomain>
 <b9f0e292-a29a-3c70-a215-cd6fc2ffbc6a@digirati.com.br>
 <20180709195319.GD8880@localhost.localdomain>
 <ababf6ae-28f5-359c-8574-a2c3306167d2@digirati.com.br>
 <20180709214016.GD10923@localhost.localdomain>
 <CAM_iQpW9pqSMZfJsfntZtva8wrfsw8UpQAg0ryumu5pPbgJ2UQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Michel Machado <michel@digirati.com.br>,
        Nishanth Devarajan <ndev2021@gmail.com>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Cody Doucette <doucette@bu.edu>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-qt0-f193.google.com ([209.85.216.193]:41945 "EHLO
        mail-qt0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1726783AbeGKTj1 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 11 Jul 2018 15:39:27 -0400
Received: by mail-qt0-f193.google.com with SMTP id e19-v6so7895611qtp.8
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 12:33:40 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAM_iQpW9pqSMZfJsfntZtva8wrfsw8UpQAg0ryumu5pPbgJ2UQ@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 07:25:53PM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 2:40 PM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
> <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 05:03:31PM -0400, Michel Machado wrote:
> > >    Changing TC_PRIO_MAX from 15 to 63 risks breaking backward compatibility
> > > with applications.
> >
> > If done, it needs to be done carefully, indeed. I don't know if it's
> > doable, neither I know how hard is your requirement for 64 different
> > priorities.
> 
> struct tc_prio_qopt {
>         int     bands;                  /* Number of bands */
>         __u8    priomap[TC_PRIO_MAX+1]; /* Map: logical priority -> PRIO band */
> };
> 
> How would you do it carefully?

quick shot, multiplex v1 and v2 formats based on bands and sizeof():

#define TCQ_PRIO_BANDS_V1	16
#define TCQ_PRIO_BANDS_V2	64
#define TC_PRIO_MAX_V2		64

struct tc_prio_qopt_v2 {
        int     bands;                  /* Number of bands */
        __u8    priomap[TC_PRIO_MAX_V2+1]; /* Map: logical priority -> PRIO band */
};

static int prio_tune(struct Qdisc *sch, struct nlattr *opt,
                     struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
{
        struct prio_sched_data *q = qdisc_priv(sch);
        struct Qdisc *queues[TCQ_PRIO_BANDS_V2];
        int oldbands = q->bands, i;
        struct tc_prio_qopt_v2 *qopt;

        if (nla_len(opt) < sizeof(int))
                return -EINVAL;
        qopt = nla_data(opt);

	if (qopt->bands <= TCQ_PRIO_BANDS_V1 &&
            nla_len(opt) < sizeof(struct tc_prio_qopt))
                return -EINVAL;

	if (qopt->bands <= TCQ_PRIO_BANDS_V2 &&
            nla_len(opt) < sizeof(*qopt))
                return -EINVAL;

	/* By here, if it has up to 3 bands, we can assume it is using the _v1
	 * layout, while if it has up to TCQ_PRIO_BANDS_V2 it is using the _v2
	 * format.
	 */

        if (qopt->bands > TCQ_PRIO_BANDS_V2 || qopt->bands < 2)
                return -EINVAL;
...

With something like this I think it can keep compatibility with old
software while also allowing the new usage.

> Also, it is not only used by prio but also pfifo_fast.

Yes. More is needed, indeed. prio2band would also need to be expanded,
etc. Yet, I still don't see any blocker.