[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1185847324.5162.31.camel@localhost>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:02:04 -0400
From: jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: greearb@...delatech.com, kaber@...sh.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
mcarlson@...adcom.com
Subject: Re: RFC: on [ab]use of skb->cb by VLAN code
On Mon, 2007-30-07 at 18:33 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> I understand the concern, but how much qdisc stuff can possibly
> happen between those two ->hard_start_xmit() calls and do we
> want to support that in any way anyways?
>>From a quick glance only netem seems to use it in the fast path (in a
legit way)
Theoretically, you could have many generations (i.e parents and
children, grandchildren etc) of netdevices stacked on top of each other
each with qdiscs. In a simple example: dont know how well these days
Vlans->bonding->somehardwarenetdevice works.
Redirect will could also result in a graph of unrelated netdevices (and
it is fair game to trample on cb anywhere along the path)
I came across the issue because i used cb in batching to store transient
state which is used between qdisc dequeueing and hardware enqueueing
(looked and smelled legit to me).
> The only alternative I see is to add more things to struct sk_buff
> and that's usually very unpopular :-)
I know ;-> Thats why i asked the question.
cheers,
jamal
-
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists