Andre Guedes writes:
>> If standard defines it as per-MAC and we can reasonably expect vendors
>> won't try to "add value" and make it per queue (unlikely here AFAIU),
>> then for this part ethtool configuration seems okay to me.
>
> Before we move forward with this hybrid approach, let's recap a
Hi,
Quoting Jakub Kicinski (2020-05-18 16:09:06)
> On Mon, 18 May 2020 16:05:08 -0700 Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
> > Jakub Kicinski writes:
> > >> That was the (only?) strong argument in favor of having frame preemption
> > >> in the TC side when this was last discussed.
> > >>
> > >> We can ha
Joergen Andreasen writes:
>> So I thought I was better to let the driver decide what values are
>> acceptable.
>>
>> This is a good question for people working with other hardware.
>>
>
> I think it's most intuitive to use the values for AddFragSize as described in
> 802.3br (N = 0, 1, 2, 3).
>
The 05/19/2020 16:37, Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
>
> Andre Guedes writes:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Quoting Vinicius Costa Gomes (2020-05-15 18:29:44)
> >> One example, for retrieving and setting the configuration:
> >>
> >> $ ethtool $ sudo ./ethtool --show-frame-preemption enp3s0
> >> Frame preemptio
Hi Vinicius,
On 5/19/20 7:37 PM, Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
Andre Guedes writes:
Hi,
Quoting Vinicius Costa Gomes (2020-05-15 18:29:44)
One example, for retrieving and setting the configuration:
$ ethtool $ sudo ./ethtool --show-frame-preemption enp3s0
Frame preemption settings for enp3s0
Andre Guedes writes:
> Hi,
>
> Quoting Vinicius Costa Gomes (2020-05-15 18:29:44)
>> One example, for retrieving and setting the configuration:
>>
>> $ ethtool $ sudo ./ethtool --show-frame-preemption enp3s0
>> Frame preemption settings for enp3s0:
>> support: supported
>> active
Andre Guedes writes:
>> >
>> >> active: active
>> >> supported queues: 0xf
>
> Following the same rationale, is this 'supported queue' going aways as well?
>
I think so, with good error messages, when trying to set an express-only
queue as preemptible, no need to expose this informatio
Hi,
Quoting Vinicius Costa Gomes (2020-05-18 12:34:22)
> Hi,
>
> Michal Kubecek writes:
>
> > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 06:29:44PM -0700, Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> This series adds support for configuring frame preemption, as defined
> >> by IEEE 802.1Q-2018 (previously IEEE
Hi,
Quoting Vinicius Costa Gomes (2020-05-15 18:29:44)
> One example, for retrieving and setting the configuration:
>
> $ ethtool $ sudo ./ethtool --show-frame-preemption enp3s0
> Frame preemption settings for enp3s0:
> support: supported
> active: active
IIUC the code in patch 2
Hi,
Am 2020-05-18 15:36, schrieb Murali Karicheri:
Hi,
On 5/17/20 11:06 AM, Michael Walle wrote:
What about the Qbu handshake state? And some NICs support overriding
this. I.e. enable frame preemption even if the handshake wasn't
successful.
You are talking about Verify procedure to hand sha
Murali Karicheri writes:
>> That was the (only?) strong argument in favor of having frame preemption
>> in the TC side when this was last discussed.
>>
>> We can have a hybrid solution, we can move the express/preemptible per
>> queue map to mqprio/taprio/whatever. And have the more specific
>>
Oltean ; Po Liu ; m-
>> kariche...@ti.com; jose.ab...@synopsys.com
>> Subject: Re: [next-queue RFC 0/4] ethtool: Add support for frame
>> preemption
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Michal Kubecek writes:
>>
>> > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 06:29:44PM -0700, Vinicius
On 5/18/20 6:06 PM, Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
Hi,
Jakub Kicinski writes:
Please take a look at the example from the cover letter:
$ ethtool $ sudo ./ethtool --show-frame-preemption
enp3s0 Frame preemption settings for enp3s0:
support: supported
active: active
sup
Hi Vinicius,
On 5/19/20 11:32 AM, Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
Murali Karicheri writes:
$ ethtool $ sudo ./ethtool --show-frame-preemption enp3s0
Frame preemption settings for enp3s0:
support: supported
active: active
supported queues: 0xf
I assume this is will be in
Murali Karicheri writes:
>> $ ethtool $ sudo ./ethtool --show-frame-preemption enp3s0
>> Frame preemption settings for enp3s0:
>> support: supported
>> active: active
>> supported queues: 0xf
>
> I assume this is will be in sync with ethtool -L output which indicates
> how many tx
Hi Vinicius,
On 5/15/20 9:29 PM, Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
Hi,
This series adds support for configuring frame preemption, as defined
by IEEE 802.1Q-2018 (previously IEEE 802.1Qbu) and IEEE 802.3br.
Frame preemption allows a packet from a higher priority queue marked
as "express" to preempt a
ynopsys.com
> Subject: Re: [next-queue RFC 0/4] ethtool: Add support for frame
> preemption
>
> Hi,
>
> Michal Kubecek writes:
>
> > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 06:29:44PM -0700, Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> This series adds su
On Mon, 18 May 2020 16:05:08 -0700 Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
> Jakub Kicinski writes:
> >> That was the (only?) strong argument in favor of having frame preemption
> >> in the TC side when this was last discussed.
> >>
> >> We can have a hybrid solution, we can move the express/preemptible per
Jakub Kicinski writes:
>> That was the (only?) strong argument in favor of having frame preemption
>> in the TC side when this was last discussed.
>>
>> We can have a hybrid solution, we can move the express/preemptible per
>> queue map to mqprio/taprio/whatever. And have the more specific
>> co
On Mon, 18 May 2020 15:06:26 -0700 Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
> Jakub Kicinski writes:
> >
> > Please take a look at the example from the cover letter:
> >
> > $ ethtool $ sudo ./ethtool --show-frame-preemption
> > enp3s0 Frame preemption settings for enp3s0:
> > support: supported
> > ac
Hi,
Jakub Kicinski writes:
>
> Please take a look at the example from the cover letter:
>
> $ ethtool $ sudo ./ethtool --show-frame-preemption
> enp3s0 Frame preemption settings for enp3s0:
> support: supported
> active: active
> supported queues: 0xf
> supported queues: 0
On Mon, 18 May 2020 12:05:04 -0700 Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
> David Miller writes:
> > From: Vladimir Oltean
> > Date: Sun, 17 May 2020 00:03:39 +0300
> >
> >> As to why this doesn't go to tc but to ethtool: why would it go to tc?
> >
> > Maybe you can't %100 duplicate the on-the-wire spec
Hi,
Michal Kubecek writes:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 06:29:44PM -0700, Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This series adds support for configuring frame preemption, as defined
>> by IEEE 802.1Q-2018 (previously IEEE 802.1Qbu) and IEEE 802.3br.
>>
>> Frame preemption allows a packet from
Hi,
David Miller writes:
> From: Vladimir Oltean
> Date: Sun, 17 May 2020 00:03:39 +0300
>
>> As to why this doesn't go to tc but to ethtool: why would it go to tc?
>
> Maybe you can't %100 duplicate the on-the-wire special format and
> whatever, but the queueing behavior ABSOLUTELY you can emu
Hi,
On 5/17/20 11:06 AM, Michael Walle wrote:
What about the Qbu handshake state? And some NICs support overriding
this. I.e. enable frame preemption even if the handshake wasn't
successful.
You are talking about Verify procedure to hand shake with peer to
know if remote support IET fragmentat
Hi Andrew,
On Sun, 17 May 2020 at 21:45, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>
> On Sun, May 17, 2020 at 01:51:19PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Sun, 17 May 2020 at 01:19, David Miller wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Vladimir Oltean
> > > Date: Sun, 17 May 2020 00:03:39 +0300
> > >
> > > > As to why this doesn
On Sun, May 17, 2020 at 01:51:19PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Sun, 17 May 2020 at 01:19, David Miller wrote:
> >
> > From: Vladimir Oltean
> > Date: Sun, 17 May 2020 00:03:39 +0300
> >
> > > As to why this doesn't go to tc but to ethtool: why would it go to tc?
> >
> > Maybe you can't %10
Am Fri, 15 May 2020 18:29:44 -0700
schrieb Vinicius Costa Gomes :
> Hi,
>
> This series adds support for configuring frame preemption, as defined
> by IEEE 802.1Q-2018 (previously IEEE 802.1Qbu) and IEEE 802.3br.
>
> Frame preemption allows a packet from a higher priority queue marked
> as "expr
On Sun, 17 May 2020 at 01:19, David Miller wrote:
>
> From: Vladimir Oltean
> Date: Sun, 17 May 2020 00:03:39 +0300
>
> > As to why this doesn't go to tc but to ethtool: why would it go to tc?
>
> Maybe you can't %100 duplicate the on-the-wire special format and
> whatever, but the queueing behav
From: Vladimir Oltean
Date: Sun, 17 May 2020 00:03:39 +0300
> As to why this doesn't go to tc but to ethtool: why would it go to tc?
Maybe you can't %100 duplicate the on-the-wire special format and
whatever, but the queueing behavior ABSOLUTELY you can emulate in
software.
And then you have th
Hi David,
On Sat, 16 May 2020 at 23:39, David Miller wrote:
>
> From: Vinicius Costa Gomes
> Date: Fri, 15 May 2020 18:29:44 -0700
>
> > This series adds support for configuring frame preemption, as defined
> > by IEEE 802.1Q-2018 (previously IEEE 802.1Qbu) and IEEE 802.3br.
> >
> > Frame preemp
From: Vinicius Costa Gomes
Date: Fri, 15 May 2020 18:29:44 -0700
> This series adds support for configuring frame preemption, as defined
> by IEEE 802.1Q-2018 (previously IEEE 802.1Qbu) and IEEE 802.3br.
>
> Frame preemption allows a packet from a higher priority queue marked
> as "express" to p
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 06:29:44PM -0700, Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This series adds support for configuring frame preemption, as defined
> by IEEE 802.1Q-2018 (previously IEEE 802.1Qbu) and IEEE 802.3br.
>
> Frame preemption allows a packet from a higher priority queue marked
> as "e
Hi,
This series adds support for configuring frame preemption, as defined
by IEEE 802.1Q-2018 (previously IEEE 802.1Qbu) and IEEE 802.3br.
Frame preemption allows a packet from a higher priority queue marked
as "express" to preempt a packet from lower priority queue marked as
"preemptible". The i
34 matches
Mail list logo
