[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121222101521.08c783ac@stein>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2012 10:15:21 +0100
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To: stephan.gatzka@...il.com
Cc: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: IPv6 over Firewire
On Dec 22 Stephan Gatzka wrote:
>
> > Something like this:
> >
> > static inline int ndisc_opt_addr_space(struct net_device *dev)
> > {
> > - return NDISC_OPT_SPACE(dev->addr_len + ndisc_addr_option_pad(dev->type));
> > + switch (dev->type) {
> > + case ARPHRD_IEEE1394:
> > + return sizeof(struct ndisc_opt_ieee1394_llinfo);
> > + default:
> > + return NDISC_OPT_SPACE(dev->addr_len + ndisc_addr_option_pad(dev->type));
> > + }
> > }
> >
> > --yoshfuji
> >
>
> O.k., this has the advantage that only ndisc packets get some more
> memory, but the question is if we are under such a hard memory pressure
> that we don't allow that.
>
> Your solution has the disadvantage that now I have to publish struct
> ndisc_opt_ieee1394_llinfo to the ndisc stuff. Nobody in ndisc.c really
> wants to deal with that structure, only the size is of interest. So
> keeping this struct private is less invasive to the rest of linux. Just
> my two cents.
You could add another case to include/net/ndisc.h::ndisc_addr_option_pad()
with a hardcoded size, couldn't you?
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-===-- ==-- =-==-
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
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