On Tue, 30 Aug 2022 at 12:28, Miroslav Lichvar <mlich...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 09:30:33AM +0200, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote: > > ptp4l supports setting of socket priority. This is useful for traffic > shaping > > e.g., utilizing Tx steering using TAPRIO or mqprio Qdisc or VLAN egress > > mappings. > > > > However, that's only implemented for Layer 2 transport. Extend this for > UDPv4 > > and UDPv6 transports. Update the man page accordingly. > > It makes sense to me. > > > @@ -196,6 +196,19 @@ static int udp_open(struct transport *t, struct > interface *iface, > > pr_warning("Failed to set general DSCP priority."); > > } > > > > + socket_priority = config_get_int(t->cfg, "global", > "socket_priority"); > > + > > + if (socket_priority && > > + setsockopt(efd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_PRIORITY, &socket_priority, > > + sizeof(socket_priority))) { > > + pr_warning("Failed to set event socket priority."); > > + } > > + if (socket_priority && > > + setsockopt(gfd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_PRIORITY, &socket_priority, > > + sizeof(socket_priority))) { > > + pr_warning("Failed to set general socket priority."); > > Is it useful to set the priority for non-event messages? Their timing > is not so important and there can be a lot of traffic generated > remotely (e.g. management messages). > As I understand, the traffic is low. Anyway, as it is a socket option. You would need an additional socket. Is it really worth having multiple sockets? > > -- > Miroslav Lichvar > > > > _______________________________________________ > Linuxptp-devel mailing list > Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel >
_______________________________________________ Linuxptp-devel mailing list Linuxptp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxptp-devel