From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E08A12BC5 for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2016 20:03:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 07 Dec 2016 11:03:36 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,315,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="909799777" Received: from irsmsx109.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.23]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 07 Dec 2016 11:03:35 -0800 Received: from irsmsx112.ger.corp.intel.com (10.108.20.5) by IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.3.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Wed, 7 Dec 2016 19:03:34 +0000 Received: from irsmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.11.159]) by irsmsx112.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.113]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Wed, 7 Dec 2016 19:03:34 +0000 From: "Dumitrescu, Cristian" To: Stephen Hemminger CC: "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] ethdev: abstraction layer for QoS hierarchical scheduler Thread-Index: AQHSSzXynsac9sXyqk++qsVVyCqc5aD7XdMAgAF9TCA= Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 19:03:34 +0000 Message-ID: <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D89126527112A9@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1480529810-95280-1-git-send-email-cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com> <20161206115124.67ccc0c7@xeon-e3> In-Reply-To: <20161206115124.67ccc0c7@xeon-e3> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiMjMzZWNlOGYtYzQxNy00NWZmLWIwNmYtMDIzNjFmYWUzNzU2IiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX0lDIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE2LjIuMTEuMCIsIlRydXN0ZWRMYWJlbEhhc2giOiJ6MHliem5rWnp2d3dMQ2IrR3hCdys1K2pMcjBYZDRlcXBTNDdtZkZzYU9nPSJ9 x-ctpclassification: CTP_IC x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.182] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] ethdev: abstraction layer for QoS hierarchical scheduler X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2016 19:03:44 -0000 Hi Steve, Thanks for your comments! > This seems to be more of an abstraction of existing QoS. Really? Why exactly do you say this, any particular examples? I think the current proposal provides an abstraction for far more features = than librte_sched provides. The goal for this API is to be able to describe= virtually any hierarchy that could be implemented in HW and/or SW, not jus= t what is currently provided by librte_sched. If your statement is true, then I failed in my mission, and hopefully I did= n't :) > Why not something like Linux Qdisc or FreeBSD DummyNet/PF/ALTQ where the = Qos components are stackable objects?=20 After designing Packet Framework, I don't think anybody could suspect me of= not being a fan of stackable objects ;). Not sure why you say this either,= as basically current proposal builds the hierarchy out of inter-connected = nodes sitting on top of shapers and WRED contexts. To me, this is a decent = stack? I don't think this proposal is that far away from Linux qdisc: qdisc classe= s are nodes, shapers are present, WRED contexts as well. Any particular qdi= sc feature you see missing? Of course, Linux qdisc also includes classification, policing, marking, etc= which are outside of the hierarchical scheduling that is targeted by this = proposal. But this is an interesting thought: designing a qdisc-like layer = within DPDK that binds together classification, policing, filters, scheduli= ng. > And why not make it the same as existing OS abstractions? Do you mean using the Linux qdisc API and implementation as is? Of course, = this is GPL licensed code and we cannot do this in DPDK. Do you mean having a Linux qdisc-like API? I largely agree with this, and I= think the current proposal is very much inline with this; if you think oth= erwise, again, specific examples of what's missing would help a lot. I can = also take a look at DummyNet to make sure there is nothing left behind. > Rather than reinventing wheel which seems to be DPDK Standard Procedure, = could an existing abstraction be used? I thought we are just trying to create a car instead of a faster horse :) Regards, Cristian