On Thu Feb 13 2025, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > So, confusingly to me, it seems like one operating mode is fundamentally > different from the other, and something will have to change if both will > be made to behave the same. What will change? You say mqprio will behave > like taprio, but I think if anything, mqprio is the one which does the > right thing, in igc_tsn_tx_arb(), and taprio seems to use the default Tx > arbitration scheme? Correct. taprio is using the default scheme. mqprio configures it to what ever the user provided (in igc_tsn_tx_arb()). > I don't think I'm on the same page as you guys, because to me, it is > just odd that the P traffic classes would be the first ones with > mqprio, but the last ones with taprio. I think we are on the same page here. At the end both have to behave the same. Either by using igc_tsn_tx_arb() for taprio too or only using the default scheme for both (and thereby keeping broken_mqprio). Whatever Faizal implements I'll match the behavior with mqprio. Thanks, Kurt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
