From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Harald Welte Subject: Re: PF_RING: Include in main line kernel? Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 14:56:17 +0200 Message-ID: <20091018125617.GI27747@prithivi.gnumonks.org> References: <903D7FEC-34E8-4F70-ABC0-E56A3A5FBBE6@ntop.org> <20091014.131526.181354809.davem@davemloft.net> <20091014.132911.174712308.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Miller , bcook@bpointsys.com, brad.doctor@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Luca Deri Return-path: Received: from ganesha.gnumonks.org ([213.95.27.120]:53888 "EHLO ganesha.gnumonks.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754167AbZJRM4b (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Oct 2009 08:56:31 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Dear Luca, On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:34:17PM +0200, Luca Deri wrote: > so do you want me to start porting PF_RING facilities into > PF_PACKET? As I have said I;m not against this: my goal is to > include this work into the linux kernel, as it has been separate for > too long. I would suggest you do some analysis of each of the features that PF_RING currently offers, and think about how each those features could be added as an incremental change to PF_PACKET. Then post this as a RFC to the list, see what people think about each of those issues and follow with the actual implementation. If you think the actual implementation might be easier than to make a written proposal, that would of course also be great. Regards, -- - Harald Welte http://laforge.gnumonks.org/ ============================================================================ "Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option." (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)