From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4]: Revamp TX hashing. Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:41:26 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20090128.124126.119524270.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20090127.164024.141230513.davem@davemloft.net> <20090128090203.GA15674@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:37113 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757439AbZA1Ul3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jan 2009 15:41:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20090128090203.GA15674@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Herbert Xu Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 20:02:03 +1100 > One thing that I've been thinking about is that it would be > really useful if we guaranteed that every inbound packet carried > a hash with it. This could be used to help subsequent processing > such as routing, netfilter, etc. since they all need to make > decisions based on flows. Ok, all the complicated cases will have to occur in decapsulators :-) For example, IP tunnels would need to compute the hash as would most forms of IPSEC since often we can't even see the inner flow until after decryption even for transport cases.