On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 11:27:43AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 09/01/2017 10:55 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > Hi Florian
> >
> >>>> tc bind dev sw0p0 queue 0 dev eth0 queue 16
> >
> > It this the eth0 i don't like here. Why not in the implementation just
> > use something like netdev_master_upper_dev_get('sw0p0')? Or does
>
> Last I brought this up with Jiri that we should link DSA network devices
> to their master network deviecs with netdev_upper_dev_link() he said
> this was not appropriate for DSA slave network devices, but I can't
> remember why, I would assume that any stacked device set up would do that.
There is some form a linking going, our device names show that:
9: lan5@eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state DOWN mode
DEFAULT group default qlen 1000
link/ether da:87:2a:03:cf:16 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
> In any case, we need to establish a mapping so we have to specify at
> least the target device's queue number. It is quite similar in premise
> to e.g: enslaving a network device to a bridge port:
>
> ip link set dev eth0 master br0
But here br0 is absolutely required, we have to say which bridge the
slave port should be a member of.
But what good is eth0 in
tc bind dev sw0p0 queue 0 dev eth0 queue 16
As i said suggesting, you have to somehow verify that eth0 is the
conduit interface sw0p0 is using. Which makes the parameter pointless.
Determine it from the sw0p0 somehow.
Andrew
