> This, presumably, would reach down to set a flag on the device to
> tell dev_queue_xmit_nit to check the protocol specific list as
> well as the all list? Or could it be handled when the packet
> socket is bound? After all you have to bind to set the protocol
> so at that point you know which device is affected.
Seems, dev->nit_count incremented by packet socket
when it binds to a device will be enough. In this case
we could even remove global nit count, scanning device list
instead and incrementing dev->nit_count on all of them.
> In fact should bound packet sockets be moved to device specific
> lists? The current global list with the device check inside the
> loop means that a single packet socket affects _every_ device.
> This sounds wrong. A machine running diald (with its snooping
> sockets) is, by definition, going to be acting as a router which
> is the sort of thing that wants a fast path between interfaces...
It is true, but only partially. Yes, common list really affects
nodes f.e. with interface to 100Mbit ethernet and to ppp channel.
But take into account, that the situation is marginal.
If you use diald, it is very unlikely, that you have an interface
to high speed network. Probably, we will lose more than win.
> Ah, the comment in include/linux/if_packet.h is perhaps misleading
> then. For PACKET_OUTGOING it says "Originated by us". Maybe this
> should be changed to simply "Outgoing" and the comments for the
> others should be prefixed with "Incoming to"?
Really 8)
Alexey Kuznetsov
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html