On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 16:59 +0300, Tomas Winkler wrote: > > Well qdiscs don't just do that, depending on the configuration, so we > > shouldn't rely on them doing just that. > > I know but this was the primary purpose of MQ to push the scheduling > decision to HW if I'm not mistaken. I thought it was more about the upper level locking, ethernet hw really just round-robins most of the time. Although it will, of course, be used for scheduling decisions. Is aggregation really a scheduling decision though? > We really don't need anything else just queueing. Exactly, but qdiscs do most definitely not provide just queueing, and we should not deprive the user of the ability to use qdiscs on wireless. > For example what the > prioritization which is done in current wme.c > is wrong and it won't pass certification and creates starvation. > Tested and proved. Can you explain how starvation happens? In what scenarios? With or without aggregation? johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
