[LARTC] cbq: bug or not?

Linux Advanced Routing and Traffic Control

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

I found that if I do this:
tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: cbq bandwidth 10Mbit allot 1514
avpkt 1514
tc filter add dev eth0 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 u32 match ip dst
192.168.1.0/24 flowid 1:0

everything works ok, I can direct packets to the parent flow without any
problem.

But if I make a subclass, I can not direct to parent anymore, only to
his children.

tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: cbq bandwidth 10Mbit allot 1514
avpkt 1514
tc class add dev eth0 parent 1:0 classid 1:1 cbq bandwidth 56kbit avpkt
1514 rate 56kbit allot 1514 maxburst 5 prio 5 bounded isolated
tc filter add dev eth0 parent 1:0 protocol ip prio 1 u32 match ip dst
192.168.1.0/24 flowid 1:0

as shows this example, if I direct to the parent when it has children,
the kernel cycles forever in cbq_classify() function in the for (;;)
loop. The question is, is it a bug or I just don't understand CBQ's
idea? Can I direct packets to the parent when it has children?


Thanks in advance

Nikolai



[Index of Archives]     [LARTC Home Page]     [Netfilter]     [Netfilter Development]     [Network Development]     [Bugtraq]     [GCC Help]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Fedora Users]
  Powered by Linux