From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D78EC433E0 for ; Mon, 18 May 2020 23:05:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E3A12075F for ; Mon, 18 May 2020 23:05:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728526AbgERXFK (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 May 2020 19:05:10 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:62611 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726500AbgERXFJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 May 2020 19:05:09 -0400 IronPort-SDR: hWjlBiSqHKCn4SP7YBTgn3/FIwblR431N6awWbO9HHV0VeV/I1FLmr1LjKAuRGT/ywJ2SWe4C3 tsvlTUvLaybQ== X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 May 2020 16:05:09 -0700 IronPort-SDR: BZc/+100b4RwADPSRT7/NZ3iIw4uysEQHNPFV93tc7/bGVqYykRIbYbfAE+CFzpUc/6x5ybfbu 5tqEf0GerwmQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,407,1583222400"; d="scan'208";a="465924199" Received: from melassa-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO ellie) ([10.212.228.130]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 18 May 2020 16:05:08 -0700 From: Vinicius Costa Gomes To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: David Miller , olteanv@gmail.com, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, vladimir.oltean@nxp.com, po.liu@nxp.com, m-karicheri2@ti.com, Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com Subject: Re: [next-queue RFC 0/4] ethtool: Add support for frame preemption In-Reply-To: <20200518152259.29d2e3c7@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> References: <20200516012948.3173993-1-vinicius.gomes@intel.com> <20200516.133739.285740119627243211.davem@davemloft.net> <20200516.151932.575795129235955389.davem@davemloft.net> <87wo59oyhr.fsf@intel.com> <20200518135613.379f6a63@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <87h7wcq4nx.fsf@intel.com> <20200518152259.29d2e3c7@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 16:05:08 -0700 Message-ID: <87blmkq1y3.fsf@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Jakub Kicinski writes: >> That was the (only?) strong argument in favor of having frame preemption >> in the TC side when this was last discussed. >> >> We can have a hybrid solution, we can move the express/preemptible per >> queue map to mqprio/taprio/whatever. And have the more specific >> configuration knobs, minimum fragment size, etc, in ethtool. >> >> What do you think? > > Does the standard specify minimum fragment size as a global MAC setting? Yes, it's a per-MAC setting, not per-queue. -- Vinicius