On Sun, May 17, 2020 at 01:51:19PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Sun, 17 May 2020 at 01:19, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: > > > > From: Vladimir Oltean <olte...@gmail.com> > > Date: Sun, 17 May 2020 00:03:39 +0300 > > > > > As to why this doesn't go to tc but to ethtool: why would it go to tc? > > > > Maybe you can't %100 duplicate the on-the-wire special format and > > whatever, but the queueing behavior ABSOLUTELY you can emulate in > > software. > > > > And then you have the proper hooks added for HW offload which can > > do the on-the-wire stuff. > > > > That's how we do these things, not with bolted on ethtool stuff. > > When talking about frame preemption in the way that it is defined in > 802.1Qbu and 802.3br, it says or assumes nothing about queuing. It > describes the fact that there are 2 MACs per interface, 1 MAC dealing > with some traffic classes and the other dealing with the rest.
I did not follow the previous discussion, but i assume you talked about modelling it in Linux as two MACs? Why was that approach not followed? Andrew
