Re: Resubmit: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-17 Thread David S. Miller
From: Amnon Aaronsohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:24:59 +0200 (IST) > Currently when PRIO is configured to use N bands, it lets the packets be > directed to any of the bands 0..N-1. However, PRIO attaches a fifo qdisc > only to the bands that appear in the priomap; the rest of th

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-15 Thread jamal
On Mon, 2006-16-01 at 05:46 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote: > So as you can see it is perfectly fine to classify to any band without > even using priomap. I dont think there is any arguement about that (eventually you have to fall to priomap though). I could also specify with filters or eventually

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-15 Thread Patrick McHardy
jamal wrote: On Mon, 2006-16-01 at 05:24 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote: If I say I want n bands, I don't want half of them initialized and the other half not. That's just confusing. Thats where we disagree - The kernel should not be making such decisions. Corrolary: If i wanted to have the b

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-15 Thread jamal
On Mon, 2006-16-01 at 05:24 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote: > jamal wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-16-01 at 01:21 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote: > > > >> > >>Well, part of the mechanism is manuall classification without > >>the priomap using filters or skb->priority. So I disagree with > >>this statement. >

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-15 Thread Patrick McHardy
jamal wrote: On Mon, 2006-16-01 at 01:21 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote: Well, part of the mechanism is manuall classification without the priomap using filters or skb->priority. So I disagree with this statement. So lets agree to disagree then. If i create a policy which specifies what pack

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-15 Thread jamal
On Mon, 2006-16-01 at 01:21 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote: > jamal wrote: > > The policy comes from user space. The kernel is supposed to be dumb, > > it just implements the mechanisms. If you tell the kernel > > "here are 4 queues but i only want you to send packets to the > > first 3" and then so

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-15 Thread Patrick McHardy
jamal wrote: On Fri, 2006-13-01 at 18:16 +0100, Thomas Graf wrote: * Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-01-12 06:25 In the last case in prio_classify (band < q->bands) the band is returned directly. This could come from attached filters or from skb->priority. Its still not a fix since

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-15 Thread jamal
On Fri, 2006-13-01 at 18:16 +0100, Thomas Graf wrote: > * Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-01-12 06:25 > > > > In the last case in prio_classify (band < q->bands) the band > > is returned directly. This could come from attached filters > > or from skb->priority. Its still not a fix since

Re: Resubmit: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-14 Thread jamal
On Sat, 2006-14-01 at 16:24 +0200, Amnon Aaronsohn wrote: > Hi, > > Here's a clearer description of the patch. > > Currently when PRIO is configured to use N bands, it lets the packets be > directed to any of the bands 0..N-1. However, PRIO attaches a fifo qdisc > only to the bands that appear in

Resubmit: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-14 Thread Amnon Aaronsohn
Hi, Here's a clearer description of the patch. Currently when PRIO is configured to use N bands, it lets the packets be directed to any of the bands 0..N-1. However, PRIO attaches a fifo qdisc only to the bands that appear in the priomap; the rest of the N bands remain with a noop qdisc attached.

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-13 Thread Thomas Graf
* Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-01-12 06:25 > David S. Miller wrote: > >From: jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 23:02:45 -0500 > > > > > >>So it is an optimization - not a bug then, correct? > > > > > >It is only an optimization in as much as it avoids duplicate > >work

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-11 Thread Patrick McHardy
David S. Miller wrote: From: jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 23:02:45 -0500 So it is an optimization - not a bug then, correct? It is only an optimization in as much as it avoids duplicate work during initialization. Like you I don't see how this patch fixes anything. No

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-11 Thread jamal
On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 05:54 -0800, Amnon Aaronsohn wrote: > --- jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > You will always point to correctly initialized > > queues with any > > value of skb->priority. > > Ok, to put it concretely: > > Suppose we have prio configured thus: > > tc qdisc add dev eth0

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-11 Thread Amnon Aaronsohn
--- jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You will always point to correctly initialized > queues with any > value of skb->priority. Ok, to put it concretely: Suppose we have prio configured thus: tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: prio bands 4 This qdisc has 4 bands but it uses the default pri

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-11 Thread jamal
On Wed, 2006-11-01 at 01:54 -0800, Amnon Aaronsohn wrote: > > > So it is an optimization - not a bug then, > > correct? > > It's a bug fix that happens to be an optimization :) > > > > No matter what you set skb->priority to, that gets > > translated > > by prio2band[] which should only point to

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-11 Thread Amnon Aaronsohn
> > So it is an optimization - not a bug then, > correct? It's a bug fix that happens to be an optimization :) > No matter what you set skb->priority to, that gets > translated > by prio2band[] which should only point to actually > initialized > queues. That's not correct. If prio_classify() see

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-10 Thread David S. Miller
From: jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 23:02:45 -0500 > So it is an optimization - not a bug then, correct? It is only an optimization in as much as it avoids duplicate work during initialization. Like you I don't see how this patch fixes anything. No matter what you set skb->pr

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-10 Thread jamal
On Tue, 2006-10-01 at 07:18 -0800, Amnon Aaronsohn wrote: [..] > Anyway, even when all the bands appear in the priomap, > it makes more sense to go over each band only once as > the patch does, instead of multiple times as the > current implementation. > So it is an optimization - not a bug then

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-10 Thread Amnon Aaronsohn
--- jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Did you actually run into some issues that prompted > you to produce this > patch? Why would you want to have something not in > the priomap to > do any queueing of packets? I wrote this patch because the qdisc wasn't running correctly when I used priorities

Re: [PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-10 Thread jamal
lkml trimmed off. On Tue, 2006-10-01 at 12:30 +0200, Amnon Aaronsohn wrote: > The PRIO queuing discipline currently initializes only the bands > that appear in the priomap. It should instead initialize all the > configured bands. Did you actually run into some issues that prompted you to produce

[PATCH] net: fix PRIO qdisc bands init

2006-01-10 Thread Amnon Aaronsohn
The PRIO queuing discipline currently initializes only the bands that appear in the priomap. It should instead initialize all the configured bands. Signed-off-by: Amnon Aaronsohn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- --- linux-2.6.14/net/sched/sch_prio.c 2005-10-28 02:02:08.0 +0200 +++ work-2.6.14/n