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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25F06C0502E for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 22:10:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1344817AbiHZWKo (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Aug 2022 18:10:44 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:58414 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1344648AbiHZWKi (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Aug 2022 18:10:38 -0400 Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D70A2E0956; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 15:10:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1661551837; x=1693087837; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date: message-id:mime-version; bh=77bYjHnZqD4KTvogCFUlYz4/Jg9L/LrFTQQWO+oEYk4=; b=g0vZlNHVB58Hm5PNsjbHCgwJ9UJaUSv9KWnUnjMQihIMtzhJbcvBdLhg px6xWxuobZri3RkHLUU6UqSTxhTJZ9r2SMoPw6y2GrzceC2uZxMNz2Ul6 UwgVoIusBkoqEmF5FsisuccSt9a7/IR9RmjGZOcJ9lgXKXjZMsVP+li5v 37FsfyDXjhWmQkBmMuT8PA1eWl3xL2Lynu9W+0w4kXGGw3W1ak9dtMvIa P5s04eBVno6Hgw/exGhMAdaaRznFXwqmSgbioW8Kqlu9zw7fDP804epLv MA8bpgnS1nFGXs+0y8hZSp2eaIMzzaaILktscam6L7gPxKqEa4YP6eZc7 A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10451"; a="292182751" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.93,266,1654585200"; d="scan'208";a="292182751" Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 Aug 2022 15:10:37 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.93,266,1654585200"; d="scan'208";a="671632442" Received: from mlahpai-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO vcostago-mobl3) ([10.212.18.227]) by fmsmga008-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 Aug 2022 15:10:36 -0700 From: Vinicius Costa Gomes To: Jakub Kicinski , Johannes Berg Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Toke =?utf-8?Q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= , Avi Stern , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: taprio vs. wireless/mac80211 In-Reply-To: <20220824191500.6f4e3fb7@kernel.org> References: <117aa7ded81af97c7440a9bfdcdf287de095c44f.camel@sipsolutions.net> <20220824191500.6f4e3fb7@kernel.org> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 15:10:36 -0700 Message-ID: <87k06uk65f.fsf@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Jakub Kicinski writes: > On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 23:50:18 +0200 Johannes Berg wrote: >> Anyone have recommendations what we should do? > > Likely lack of sleep or intelligence on my side but I could not grok > from the email what the stacking is, and what the goal is. > > Are you putting taprio inside mac80211, or leaving it at the netdev > layer but taking the fq/codel out? My read was that they want to do something with taprio with wireless devices and were hit by the current limitation that taprio only supports multiqueue interfaces. The fq/codel part is that, as far as I know, there's already a fq/codel implementation inside mac80211. The stacking seems to be that packets would be scheduled by taprio and then by the scheduler inside mac80211 (fq/codel based?). Cheers, -- Vinicius