From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: net-sched 00/06: dynamically sized class hashes v2 Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:49:27 +0200 Message-ID: <486D0317.8020008@trash.net> References: <20080703151600.26225.3394.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20080703161403.GA2637@ami.dom.local> <486CF9BC.9090202@trash.net> <20080703164601.GB2637@ami.dom.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, devik@cdi.cz To: Jarek Poplawski Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:42470 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752600AbYGCQt3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jul 2008 12:49:29 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080703164601.GB2637@ami.dom.local> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Jarek Poplawski wrote: > BTW, BTW: I've just started to understand this "common" idea (I hope). > So if it's planned for some other (not searching) fields common for > classes, then of course, this name is quite sensible (maybe only a bit > too long for dereferencing). > Yes, child qdiscs, filter lists etc. would be a good start. I think we should actually have at least two types of common structs, one for hierarchical qdiscs, one for pseudo-classful like TBF, RED and netem. I have some patches but they're a big mess so I seperated out the useful stuff for now :)