* Re: [VLAN] vlan_skb_recv
[not found] ` <47B31B96.7010801@candelatech.com>
@ 2008-02-20 12:27 ` Patrick McHardy
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Patrick McHardy @ 2008-02-20 12:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ben Greear; +Cc: Linux 802.1Q VLAN, Stephen Anderson, Linux Netdev List
Ben Greear wrote:
> Stephen Anderson wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> To help increase throughput and bypass the backlog queue, I changed the
>> netif_rx() to netif_receive_skb() in vlan_skb_recv(). What's the
>> argument for using netif_rx() other than legacy maintenance? At this
>> point, interrupt context should not be an issue. Layer 2 performance
>> has been a big focus in my area of development.
I guess the only point is to reduce stack usage. Its probably not
a problem with only VLAN, but it might be with further tunnels,
IPsec, ...
>> I'm sure you have seen many attempts to implement a single VLAN aware
>> IVL FDB in the past and I was wondering which attempt do you feel was
>> the best? Have you ever considered integrating your VLAN support
>> natively into the bridging code base or know of any attempts to do just
>> that?
Without having thought about this much, it seems to me that
it needs to be integrated in the bridge fdb to work properly.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread