[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <y2lb43bf5491004260149x23beb95dqc9e177d9a6ecc679@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 10:49:55 +0200
From: Erwan Velu <erwanaliasr1@...il.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
Cc: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com,
bruce.w.allan@...el.com, alexander.h.duyck@...el.com,
peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com, john.ronciak@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] e100: expose broadcast_disabled as a module option
Agreed that will be a better implementation. Changes of IFF_BROADCAST
could play with this "broadcast_disabled" configuration switch to
increase the cpu efficiency.
I'm not a kernel expert and I don't really figure how the changes of
the IFF_BROADCAST should be forwarded to the interfaces and how it can
be manipulated. I saw that ifconfig have a '-broadcast' option but
looks like none of my drivers are compatible with that.
Does any one you could help me understanding what should be the good way to
1- enabled/disabled IFF_BROADCAST for a given interface
2- populate this changes to the driver
Once I'll be able to have a proper patch using that, I'll post it
again to the list.
Cheers,
Erwan
2010/4/24 Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>:
> On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 23:03:59 +0200
[...]
> The point is that the driver can look at IFF_BROADCAST rather than having
> module parameter. Module parameters are device driver specific and should
> be avoid as much as possible in favor of general mechanism. This is a repeated
> problem where users and vendors make special hooks that only work with their
> driver, which makes life hard for other users and distribution providers.
>
--
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