On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 05:07:50PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 04/14/2016 05:05 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 02:49:28PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 04/13/2016 06:26 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>> > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 11:04:47AM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> >>>> > >> This patch disables the default qdisc by explicitly setting the
> >>>> > >> IFF_NO_QUEUE private flag so that now the tun xmit path do not
> >>>> > >> require any lock by default.
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> > >> The default qdisc was first removed as a side effect of commit
> >>>> > >> f84bb1eac027 ("net: fix IFF_NO_QUEUE for drivers using
> >>>> > >> alloc_netdev")
> >>>> > >> and recently restored with commit 016adb7260f4 ("tuntap: restore
> >>>> > >> default qdisc")
> >>>> > >>
> >>>> > >> Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pab...@redhat.com>
> >>> > > I wonder about this back and forth.
> >>> > > Jason, do you see a workload where the default qdisc
> >>> > > is preferable?
> >> >
> >> > I don't know, but we used to behave like this so we'd better keep it.
> >> >
> >> > An interesting thing is I vaguely remember that you have some concern
> >> > when I propose IFF_NO_QUEUE for macvtap[1] :)
> >> >
> >> > [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/8/24/147
> > It's the same concern - that we aren't fully addressing
> > the problem, so if user configures a qdisc, we are back to square 1.
> > It's especially annoying that IIUC in this setup, if one
> > does configured a non default qdisc, there's no way to go back.
> > It doesn't necessarily mean we must not do it as an intermediate step,
> > though.
> >
> >> >
> >> > I think this could be done by management or more safe by introducing a
> >> > new tun flag (TUN_NO_QUEUE).
> > What exactly does this flag do/mean?
>
> It means we don't need qdisc for this tuntap, so we can set IFF_NO_QUEUE
> flag.
But what does it mean for the user? When to set it and when not to set
it?
--
MST
