From: "Tomas Winkler" <tomasw@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:34:18 +0300 > On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 8:25 PM, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 11:16:03 -0400 > > > >> IMO, in the case of multiple hardware queues per physical wire, > >> and such a netdevice already has a built-in hardware scheduler (they all > >> seem to have this feature) then if we can feed the hardware queues > >> directly, theres no need for any intermediate buffer(s). > >> In such a case, to compare with qdisc arch, its like the root qdisc is > >> in hardware. > > > > They tend to implement round-robin or some similar fairness algorithm > > amongst the queues, with zero concern about packet priorities. > > > > It really is just like a bunch of queues to the phsyical layer, > > fairly shared. > > > > These things are built for parallelization, not prioritization. > > Except wireless where HW has prioritizing scheduler per physical non-wire. > Tomas I know that. We're talking about multiqueue ethernet NICs. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
