From: "Wunderlich, Mark" <mark.wunderlich@intel.com>
To: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH rfc 2/2] nvmet-tcp: set SO_PRIORITY for network sockets
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2019 21:41:57 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <B33B37937B7F3D4CB878107E305D4916D37D17@ORSMSX104.amr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <63782282-026f-b12f-7a97-3e5d9643e262@grimberg.me>
>> +/* Define the socket priority to use for connections were it is
>> +desirable
>> + * that the NIC consider performing optimized packet processing or filtering.
>> + * A non-zero value being sufficient to indicate general
>> +consideration of any
>> + * possible optimization. Making it a module param allows for
>> +alternative
>> + * values that may be unique for some NIC implementations.
>> + */
>> +static int nvmet_tcp_so_priority;
>> +module_param(nvmet_tcp_so_priority, int, 0644);
>> +MODULE_PARM_DESC(nvmet_tcp_so_priority, "nvmet tcp socket optimize
>> +priority");
>> +
>No need for nvmet_tcp prefix I assume.
Sure. Was not sure if standard practice is to name such params specific to module. So 'so_priority', or just 'priority' would be OK?
>Should it be a bool if a non-zero value is sufficient?
Since various NIC vendors may use different actual so_priority values to trigger specific behavior thought is best to leave it adjustable. True, in our case a Boolean could be made to work for now. But future proofing may be a good thing. If we leave as is, maybe would make sense to not allow a value that would exceed the possible range to be used/set.
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvme mailing list
Linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-26 21:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-24 16:06 [PATCH rfc 2/2] nvmet-tcp: set SO_PRIORITY for network sockets Wunderlich, Mark
2019-09-26 20:03 ` Sagi Grimberg
2019-09-26 21:41 ` Wunderlich, Mark [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=B33B37937B7F3D4CB878107E305D4916D37D17@ORSMSX104.amr.corp.intel.com \
--to=mark.wunderlich@intel.com \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).