On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <a...@plumgrid.com> wrote: > On 4/23/15 1:45 PM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >> >> >> 1) the _XMIT semantics are useful on the egress side because in fact >> we do have queues and they can be attached to qdiscs etc. >> The TC_ACT_XXX codes were _intentional_ since ingress works as a >> classifier shell. > > > then it is worse mess than I thought :( > Why call it _qdisc_ then? and have special and convoluted handling for > it in qdisc_create, qdisc_graft and other places?
It needs to glue into qdisc layer, unify the abstractions. > >> Are you planning to queue things on ingress? > > I thought that was the whole purpose of ingress qdisc. There is no queue for ingress qdisc. > why then we have dev->ingress_queue? Glue layer, qdisc ties too much with txq, which is what I want to solve. We have struct netdev_rx_queue too, but look at it, there is nothing but some sysfs stuffs needed by RPS. > > If queueing was never a goal, may be we should kill ingress qdisc > and replace it with a simple shim that only does cls/act. > The code overall will get much simpler and faster. > As I said in response to your patch for skb->data, we need to align ingress with egress, rather than making more differences, this includes qdisc's too. We do have per-cpu queues for ingress, at least in theory we have a queue for ingress to use. Of course, RX is naturally different from TX, which is the root cause why we have so many differences here. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
