Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 10:03:29 -0800 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: Barney Cordoba <barney_cordoba@yahoo.com> Cc: Karim Fodil-Lemelin <fodillemlinkarim@gmail.com>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org, nodens2099@gmail.com Subject: Re: igb and ALTQ in 9.1-rc3 Message-ID: <CAJ-VmomOSrh1bhB6G3dz4LJHXKzW4KoTZSkr6%2BC9euf=mSu3Aw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1355243209.48529.YahooMailClassic@web121606.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <50C74990.2090803@gmail.com> <1355243209.48529.YahooMailClassic@web121606.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The if_transmit versus multiqueue thing is orthogonal. I'm planning to make net80211 and ath(4) use if_transmit instead of if_start. It won't be a multi-queue driver; I'm actually going down the path of if_transmit specifically so I can control the TX queue serialisation and actively _serialise_ frame TX, instead of implementing a multi-queue driver. ALTQ as a concept needs to be glued in a different way. It can't just override the queue macros like it does. That's just plain ew. net80211 has some rather quirky behaviour, unfortunately. I won't go into it here. Suffice to say, I can't just use the IFQ macros, the if_queue as it stands, nor buf_ring. Adrian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-VmomOSrh1bhB6G3dz4LJHXKzW4KoTZSkr6%2BC9euf=mSu3Aw>