On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 9:51 PM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leit...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well, it would help if you didn't cut out key parts of my words.
Sorry about it, please allow me to copy and paste all of your words here: "Yes, but Michel wants to drop from other lower priorities if needed, and that's not possible if you handle the limit already in a child qdisc as they don't know about their siblings. The idea in the example above is to discard it from whatever lower priority is needed, then queue it. (ok, the example missed to check the priority level)" So from your own words, you agreed "the idea in the example" is not what Michel wants, because "is to discard it from whatever lower priority is needed", as "Michel wants to drop from other lower priorities if needed". You also agreed Michel's requirement is not possible (to implement in sch_prio) because "you handle the limit already in a child qdisc as they don't know about their siblings" is also true. Based on the above, I said it "disproves your point of adding a flag to sch_prio". What am I missing? > > > > > What am I missing here? > > > > Are you go further by suggesting moving the limit out of prio? > > Or are you going to expand your definition of "adding a flag"? > > Perhaps two flags? :) > > > > I am very open for discussion to see how far we can go. > > I am not keen on continuing this discussion if you keep twisting my > words just for fun. No, I am trying to understand seriously about what you suggest here. Please be patient! I know I am stupid!!!! :) Thanks!
