> -----Original Message----- > From: J Hadi Salim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of jamal > Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2007 8:03 PM > To: Leonid Grossman > Cc: Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P; Patrick McHardy; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > netdev@vger.kernel.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Kok, Auke-jan H; Ramkrishna > Vepa; Alex Aizman > Subject: RE: [PATCH] NET: Multiqueue network device support. > > our definition of "channel" on linux so far is a netdev > (not a DMA ring). A netdev is the entity that can be bound to a CPU. > Link layer flow control terminates (and emanates) from the netdev.
I think we are saying the same thing. Link layer flow control frames are generated (and terminated) by the hardware; the hardware gets configured by netdev. And if a hw channel has enough resources, it could be configured as a separate netdev and handle it's flow control the same way single-channel NICs do now. I'm not advocating flow control on per DMA ring basis. > > This is not what I'm saying :-). The IEEE link you sent shows that > > per-link flow control is a separate effort, and it will likely to > take > > time to become a standard. > > Ok, my impression was it was happening already or it will happen > tommorow morning ;-> the proposal you mentioned is dated 2005, but something like that will probably happen sooner or later in IEEE. Some non-standard options, including ours, are already here - but as we just discussed, in any case flow control is arguably a netdev property not a queue property. The multi-queue patch itself though (and possibly some additional per-queue properties) is a good thing :-) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
