[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4873EEC6.1060306@trash.net>
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2008 00:48:38 +0200
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/04]: VLAN vs. packet socket inconsistencies
David Miller wrote:
> From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
> Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 15:35:10 -0700 (PDT)
>
>
>> From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
>> Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2008 00:30:04 +0200
>>
>>
>>> That sounds good. Userspace needs to know about the size of
>>> the tpacket_hdr before setting the ring parameters so it can
>>> size the ring frames appropriately for the largest packet size
>>> it wants to receive. This means the offset field in the
>>> tpacket_hdr is redundant, so I'll just add a getsockopt
>>> option for getting the size. Unless we want to be able to
>>> include only a partial tpacket_hdr, but I don't think that
>>> would be very useful.
>>>
>> Ok, in that case using a getsockopt() to query the size sounds great.
>>
>
> BTW, what you might want to do is say that if the user
> makes the new getsockopt() size query, he understands
> and wants the new style tpacket_hdr layout.
>
I'm torn between "nice hack" and "doesn't belong there".
I'll see how I feel about this once I get to that point :)
--
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