[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4832E55E.2030009@trash.net>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 16:51:10 +0200
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
CC: Peter Warasin <peter@...ian.com>,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC, VLAN]: Propagate selected feature bits to VLAN devices
Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Patrick McHardy wrote:
>> diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h
>> index b11e6e1..3be4559 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
>> @@ -514,10 +514,11 @@ struct net_device
>> #define NETIF_F_NETNS_LOCAL 8192 /* Does not change network namespaces */
>> #define NETIF_F_MULTI_QUEUE 16384 /* Has multiple TX/RX queues */
>> #define NETIF_F_LRO 32768 /* large receive offload */
>> +#define NETIF_F_VLAN_TSO 65536 /* Supports TSO for VLANs */
>>
>> /* Segmentation offload features */
>> -#define NETIF_F_GSO_SHIFT 16
>> -#define NETIF_F_GSO_MASK 0xffff0000
>> +#define NETIF_F_GSO_SHIFT 20
>> +#define NETIF_F_GSO_MASK 0xfff00000
>
> I really don't think it's a good idea to move around existing flags. How
> about stealing some of the unused high-order bits of NETIF_F_GSO_MASK
> instead?
Mhh it doesn't really belong there. Whats the problem with
moving these bits? They are only used internally (and use
up too much space anyway).
--
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