From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Nicolas_de_Peslo=FCan?= Subject: Re: [RFC patch net-next-2.6] net: allow multiple rx_handler registration Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 18:58:41 +0200 Message-ID: <4E0DFCC1.1050409@gmail.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> <4E0DFA7F.20005@candelatech.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: Ben Greear Return-path: Received: from mail-fx0-f52.google.com ([209.85.161.52]:38180 "EHLO mail-fx0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755066Ab1GAQ6r (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2011 12:58:47 -0400 Received: by fxd18 with SMTP id 18so3451502fxd.11 for ; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 09:58:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E0DFA7F.20005@candelatech.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Le 01/07/2011 18:49, Ben Greear a =E9crit : > 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 tak= e >>>>> addresses/VLANs which are not covered by other configured >>>>> macvlans/vlans. This would allow clearer configuration and would = make >>>>> 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 = its >>> 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 eth= 0, >> 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 tagg= ed >> packets to be untagged here, but I disagree with this part. eth0 is = the >> raw device and should deliver raw packets, possibly retagging packet= s >> 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. > 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. Agreed too. Nicolas.