From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Greear Subject: Re: [RFC patch net-next-2.6] net: allow multiple rx_handler registration Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 09:49:03 -0700 Message-ID: <4E0DFA7F.20005@candelatech.com> References: <1309447009-8898-1-git-send-email-jpirko@redhat.com> <20110630092712.17eb292f@nehalam.ftrdhcpuser.net> <20110630172257.GB2056@minipsycho> <4E0DE043.4030701@gmail.com> <4E0DF9C6.703@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Micha=B3_Miros=B3aw?= , Jiri Pirko , Stephen Hemminger , netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, kaber@trash.net, fubar@us.ibm.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, andy@greyhouse.net To: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Nicolas_de_Peslo=FCan?= Return-path: Received: from mail.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.172]:38536 "EHLO ns3.lanforge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757223Ab1GAQtX (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2011 12:49:23 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4E0DF9C6.703@gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/01/2011 09:45 AM, Nicolas de Peslo=FCan wrote: > Le 01/07/2011 17:01, Micha=B3 Miros=B3aw a =E9crit : > >>>> We could introduce a catch-all macvlan/vlan device that would take >>>> addresses/VLANs which are not covered by other configured >>>> macvlans/vlans. This would allow clearer configuration and would m= ake >>>> the evaluation order explicit. As a bonus, this will give another >>>> device to put tcpdump on. ;-) >>> >>> 'Sounds like what I had in mind in >>> http://marc.info/?l=3Dlinux-netdev&m=3D130622112921245&w=3D2 . >> >> Almost. My idea assumes that eth0.any won't strip VLAN headers (so i= ts >> just looks like a filtered eth0). > > I originally thought unstripped packets should go to eth0. > > But, if eth0.any get untagged packets, we face two problems: > > 1/ We need a way to retrieve the original tag. > 2/ We need a way to force the tag on output (or we consider eth0.any = a > pure tcpdump device, which is less useful). > > But if eth0.any get the exact same packets as those delivered to eth0= , > this seems useless. > > Or maybe, eth0.any should get only packets that weren't delivered to = any > eth0.XXXX devices... and should be named eth0.unmatched instead of > eth0.any :-) > > Do we need eth0.untagged too (which would only get packets that were > originally *not* tagged)? > > eth0 - Get everything, untouched. (I know several people except tagge= d > packets to be untagged here, but I disagree with this part. eth0 is t= he > 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. Packet filters should be able to filter on tags or not, so I don't think these extra interfaces would be useful or needed. We may need to fix up the sk-filter logic a bit to deal with the stripped tags, however. Thanks, Ben --=20 Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com