Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 18 Jan 2023 22:37:41 +0200
From:   Maxim Mikityanskiy <maxtram95@gmail.com>
To:     Hariprasad Kelam <hkelam@marvell.com>
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kuba@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, pabeni@redhat.com,
        edumazet@google.com, sgoutham@marvell.com, lcherian@marvell.com,
        gakula@marvell.com, jerinj@marvell.com, sbhatta@marvell.com,
        jhs@mojatatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, jiri@resnulli.us,
        saeedm@nvidia.com, richardcochran@gmail.com, tariqt@nvidia.com,
        linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next Patch v2 4/5] octeontx2-pf: Add devlink support to
 configure TL1 RR_PRIO
Message-ID: <Y8hYlYk/7FfGdfy8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20230118105107.9516-1-hkelam@marvell.com>
 <20230118105107.9516-5-hkelam@marvell.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230118105107.9516-5-hkelam@marvell.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 04:21:06PM +0530, Hariprasad Kelam wrote:
> All VFs and PF netdev shares same TL1 schedular, each interface
> PF or VF will have different TL2 schedulars having same parent
> TL1. The TL1 RR_PRIO value is static and PF/VFs use the same value
> to configure its TL2 node priority in case of DWRR children.
> 
> This patch adds support to configure TL1 RR_PRIO value using devlink.
> The TL1 RR_PRIO can be configured for each PF. The VFs are not allowed
> to configure TL1 RR_PRIO value. The VFs can get the RR_PRIO value from
> the mailbox NIX_TXSCH_ALLOC response parameter aggr_lvl_rr_prio.

I asked this question under v1, but didn't get an answer, could you shed
some light?

"Could you please elaborate how these priorities of Transmit Levels are
related to HTB priorities? I don't seem to understand why something has
to be configured with devlink in addition to HTB.

Also, what do MDQ and SMQ abbreviations mean?"

BTW, why did you remove the paragraphs with an example and a limitation?
I think they are pretty useful.

Another question unanswered under v1 was:

"Is there any technical difficulty or hardware limitation preventing from
implementing modifications?" (TC_HTB_NODE_MODIFY)