[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47BC1C9E.5050104@trash.net>
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists