netdev - Re: [RFC patch net-next-2.6] net: allow multiple rx

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 1 Jul 2011 19:08:50 +0200
From:	David Lamparter <equinox@...c24.net>
To:	Nicolas de Pesloüan <nicolas.2p.debian@...il.com>
Cc:	Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>,
	Michał Mirosław <mirqus@...il.com>,
	Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, kaber@...sh.net,
	fubar@...ibm.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com, andy@...yhouse.net
Subject: Re: [RFC patch net-next-2.6] net: allow multiple rx_handler
 registration

On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 06:58:41PM +0200, Nicolas de Pesloüan wrote:
> Le 01/07/2011 18:49, Ben Greear a écrit :
> > On 07/01/2011 09:45 AM, Nicolas de Pesloüan wrote:
> >> Le 01/07/2011 17:01, Michał Mirosław a écrit :
[...]
> >> eth0 - Get everything, untouched. (I know several people except tagged
> >> packets to be untagged here, but I disagree with this part. eth0 is the
> >> raw device and should deliver raw packets, possibly retagging packets
> >> that were untagged by hw-accel).
> >> eth0.100 - Get VLAN 100 packet, untagged.
> >> eth0.untagged - Get only non-tagged packets, untouched.
> >> eth0.unmatched - Get only tagged packets, untouched.
> >
> > Lets let the current vlan tagging changes settle a while before
> > adding yet more cruft in this area.
> 
> Agreed.

I also agree that this should sleep for a bit, I do however see a
different use: adding a device to multiple bridges.

(this kinda obviously needs a dynamic priority)

Bridges can filter their RX on everything ebtables can match, they can
even strip off VLAN tags and become "super-VLAN" devices, if you want
that. (Can't access the stripped tag though... but what isn't can
come...)

For macvlan/macvtap tbh i try to abstain from using them. Whatever
performance gains/... they give, a setup like
   (eth0-<br0>-veth0)...veth1/tap1 
appears much cleaner to me.


-David

--
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