netdev - Re: [VLAN] vlan_skb

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:27:10 +0100
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
CC:	"Linux 802.1Q VLAN" <vlan@...delatech.com>,
	Stephen Anderson <smanders@...adcom.com>,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [VLAN] vlan_skb_recv

Ben Greear wrote:
> Stephen Anderson wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> To help increase throughput and bypass the backlog queue, I changed the
>> netif_rx() to netif_receive_skb() in vlan_skb_recv().  What's the
>> argument for using netif_rx() other than legacy maintenance?  At this
>> point, interrupt context should not be an issue.  Layer 2 performance
>> has been a big focus in my area of development.


I guess the only point is to reduce stack usage. Its probably not
a problem with only VLAN, but it might be with further tunnels,
IPsec, ...

>> I'm sure you have seen many attempts to implement a single VLAN aware
>> IVL FDB in the past and I was wondering which attempt do you feel was
>> the best?  Have you ever considered integrating your VLAN support
>> natively into the bridging code base or know of any attempts to do just
>> that?


Without having thought about this much, it seems to me that
it needs to be integrated in the bridge fdb to work properly.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html