From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Cc: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
Madhu Chittim <madhu.chittim@intel.com>,
Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] HW TX Rate Limiting Driver API
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 16:57:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240424165754.1ba023ba@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1380ba9e71d500628994b0a1a7cbb108b4bf9492.camel@redhat.com>
On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 19:25:37 +0200 Paolo Abeni wrote:
> I would say just bw_min = 0, all others fields are ignored in such
> case. But not very relevant since...
> ... my understanding is that you have strong preference over the
> 'attach points' variant.
>
> I think in the end is mostly a matter of clearly define
> expectation/behavior and initial status.
Agreed, no strong preference but also no strong argument either way?
Maybe my main worry was that we have 4 "lookup modes" if every one
of them have fake nodes that's a bit messy. With fewer modes it's more
palatable.
And IIUC TC uses the magic encoding method, so that's a precedent.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-24 23:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-05 10:23 [RFC] HW TX Rate Limiting Driver API Simon Horman
2024-04-05 13:33 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2024-04-05 17:06 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-04-06 13:48 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2024-04-10 9:41 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-04-05 14:34 ` John Fastabend
2024-04-05 16:25 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-04-09 22:32 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-04-10 8:33 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-04-10 14:57 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-04-11 15:58 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-04-11 16:03 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-04-19 11:53 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-04-22 18:06 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-04-23 17:25 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-04-24 23:57 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2024-04-11 23:51 ` Vinicius Costa Gomes
2024-04-12 4:39 ` John Fastabend
2024-04-22 11:30 ` Sunil Kovvuri Goutham
2024-04-23 14:07 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-04-23 15:56 ` Sunil Kovvuri Goutham
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240424165754.1ba023ba@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=madhu.chittim@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=sridhar.samudrala@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).