From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Fastabend Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [net-next] igb: add function to set I210 transmit mode Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2016 12:03:21 -0700 Message-ID: <57AF6EF9.5090707@gmail.com> References: <1470811692-24574-1-git-send-email-gangfeng.huang@ni.com> <1470811692-24574-2-git-send-email-gangfeng.huang@ni.com> <20160813161103.GA1188@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Netdev , intel-wired-lan , Gangfeng To: Richard Cochran , Alexander Duyck Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f179.google.com ([209.85.192.179]:35288 "EHLO mail-pf0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751442AbcHNKsn (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Aug 2016 06:48:43 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f179.google.com with SMTP id x72so9242422pfd.2 for ; Sun, 14 Aug 2016 03:48:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160813161103.GA1188@localhost.localdomain> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 16-08-13 09:11 AM, Richard Cochran wrote: > On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 08:27:38AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: >> I really don' think this patch is going to work. If you are going to >> implement something like this and have a hope to get it accepted into >> the Linux kernel you need to come up with a solution that will work >> fore more than this one device. We don't want the drivers having to >> carry around their own sysfs controls for things that really are not >> proprietary to the device. There needs to be a generic kernel >> interface for this. The fact is something like QAV more than likely >> exists on other devices as well so it may be worth while to look into >> seeing if you could come up with some way of interfacing this with >> either ethtool ,iproute2, or maybe even the DCB/LLDP utilities since >> this is essentially splitting the Tx into two separate traffic >> classes. > > Yes to all of this. > >> Also for these kind of patches it would be best to include the netdev >> mailing list. That way it can be reviewed by a wider audience and you >> are much more likely to get this accepted upstream rather than have it >> rejected when Jeff Kirsher attempts to submit it. > > Right. We just had a discussion about implementing TSN, and we will > need proper infrastructure in place *before* we start hacking > drivers. > > Thanks, > Richard Ah reading my email backwards. I think we could add TSN under the mqprio qdisc and ./net/dcb infrastructure. In hindsight I wouldn't have named the infrastructure dcb as its already being used for other 802.1Q things and hardware scheduling algorithms that are not strictly DCB. .John