[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4DDB5C1B.9000207@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 09:19:55 +0200
From: Nicolas de Pesloüan
<nicolas.2p.debian@...il.com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>
CC: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>,
Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
shemminger@...ux-foundation.org, kaber@...sh.net, fubar@...ibm.com,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, andy@...yhouse.net,
Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] vlan: Do not support clearing VLAN_FLAG_REORDER_HDR
Le 24/05/2011 07:58, Jiri Pirko a écrit :
<snip>
>>> Btw what's the rationale to move untag to earlier position?
>>
>> Maybe simply because we try to mimic hw-accel, and hw-accel untagging
>> definitely happens before we enter __netif_receive_skb and only
>> happens once.
>>
>> So having software untagging inside the __netif_receive_skb loop looks different.
>
> I understand. But what code prior to current vlan_untag position needs
> to see the skb untagged?
Any protocol handlers (ptype_all or ptype_base) registered on the parent interface may need to see
the skb untagged, for all the reasons given in this thread. Arguably, doing software untagging
earlier wouldn't help. :-) We need a strong logic to decide whether and when to untag and/or
possibly re-tag.
Nicolas.
--
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