[Cerowrt-devel] FQ_Codel lwn draft article review

[Toke Høiland-Jørgensen]

"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck at linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:

> If I understand the code correctly, without BQL, FQ-CoDel does not get
> invoked at all.

But doesn't fq_codel live at the qdisc layer? How can BQL determine
whether or not fq_codel gets invoked? Or does "invoked" mean something
different in this context?

I can understand how this happens *effectively* by fq_codel just
dequeuing packets at once into the device buffers, thus rendering the
whole exercise moot.

Either way, perhaps spelling this out in the article would be a good
idea so people don't start experimenting with fq_codel and conclude it
doesn't work, when the culprit is really missing BQL support in their
driver? I know that it technically says that now, but perhaps a more
prominent mention might be prudent? :)

-Toke

-- 
Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
toke at toke.dk
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 489 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel/attachments/20121203/4e873c49/attachment.sig>