[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081003193250.GA15924@xi.wantstofly.org>
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2008 21:32:51 +0200
From: Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@...tstofly.org>
To: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Byron Bradley <byron.bbradley@...il.com>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <jdb@...x.dk>,
Tim Ellis <tim.ellis@....com>,
Andy Fleming <afleming@...escale.com>,
Imre Kaloz <kaloz@...nwrt.org>, Nicolas Pitre <nico@....org>,
Dirk Teurlings <dirk@...xia.nl>,
Peter van Valderen <p.v.valderen@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] [NET] dsa: add support for original DSA tagging format
On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 06:25:59PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > Most of the DSA switches currently in the field do not support the
> > Ethertype DSA tagging format that one of the previous patches added
> > support for, but only the original DSA tagging format.
> >
> > The original DSA tagging format carries the same information as the
> > Ethertype DSA tagging format, but with the difference that it does not
> > have an ethertype field. In other words, when receiving a packet that
> > is tagged with an original DSA tag, there is no way of telling in
> > eth_type_trans() that this packet is in fact a DSA-tagged packet.
> >
> > This patch adds a hook into eth_type_trans() which is only compiled in
> > if support for a switch chip that doesn't support Ethertype DSA is
> > selected, and which checks whether there is a DSA switch driver
> > instance attached to this network device which uses the old tag format.
> > If so, it sets the protocol field to ETH_P_DSA without looking at the
> > packet, so that the packet ends up in the right place.
> [...]
>
> Why should this go in eth_type_trans()? Why don't you put the hook into
> the specific network driver(s) that need it?
>
> For that matter, why should dsa_ptr go in struct net_device and not in
> the private state for the specific network drivers that need it?
DSA is just another protocol. Putting hooks in specific network driver
to handle a certain protocol doesn't seem like the right thing to do to
me.
--
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