From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [LARTC] ESFQ: request for user input Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 01:40:54 +0200 Message-ID: <467F0106.1070103@trash.net> References: <467ECB0C.6020105@fatooh.org> <467EDE48.307@trash.net> <467EF9B6.3040801@fatooh.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: lartc , Linux Netdev List To: Corey Hickey Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:53322 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751934AbXFXXl1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 24 Jun 2007 19:41:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: <467EF9B6.3040801@fatooh.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Corey Hickey wrote: > Patrick McHardy wrote: >>> >>> Should ESFQ be merged into SFQ or remain as a separate qdisc? >>> >> I've CCed netdev. I think merging parts of ESFQ (dynamic depth and >> flow number) would make a lot of sense, but I'm intending to submit >> an alternative to the ESFQ hashing scheme for 2.6.23: >> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg39156.html >> > > Nice. I wasn't aware of that. Your patch looks like it supersedes ESFQ's > hashing, so, if it gets applied, that already removes a large chunk of > the differences between SFQ and ESFQ. > > If I don't hear any opposition, then I'll keep an eye out for when your > patch gets accepted (assuming it does) and then submit patch(es) porting > the rest of ESFQ's features to SFQ. > I think it would be best if you would start posting patches to add the missing features (without the hash changes) to SFQ, if you're quick this may already go in during the 2.6.23 merge window. My changes are mostly independant of yours, if there are any clashes the one who goes last will just have to rediff their patches :) Since you need to pass additional parameters to SFQ for your changes, have a look at my rtnetlink compat attribute patch: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/64851