From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: Universal tap device Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2013 13:58:50 +0000 Message-ID: <201302171358.50680.arnd@arndb.de> References: <20130216140132.GB1536@minipsycho.orion> <201302162225.06536.arnd@arndb.de> <20130217093520.GA1931@minipsycho.orion> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jan Engelhardt , netdev@vger.kernel.org, ebiederm@xmission.com, stephen@networkplumber.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, davem@davemloft.net To: Jiri Pirko Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.8]:60356 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756126Ab3BQN7V (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 Feb 2013 08:59:21 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20130217093520.GA1931@minipsycho.orion> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sunday 17 February 2013, Jiri Pirko wrote: > > Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 11:25:06PM CET, arnd@arndb.de wrote: > >On Saturday 16 February 2013, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 05:46:25PM CET, jengelh@inai.de wrote: > >> >On Saturday 2013-02-16 15:01, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> > > >> >>Hi all. > >> >> > >> >>Looking at macvtap and thinking about the tap solutions in general, > >> >>I think it would be handly to have some universal tap device. > >> > > >> >As in, allowing tuntap to register as an rx_handler for arbitrary > >> >devices? > >> > >> Essentially yes, but I was thinking without the actual netdev: > >> not eth0 -> tap0 -> chardev > >> but eth0 -> chardev > >> > >> Not sure though if that is easily doable.. > > > >Isn't that the same as setting up macvtap in PASSTHRU mode? > > Yep, but without netdev instance. That brings some issues. Maybe the > netdev instance should be there. Not sure. > The idea of macvtap is at least that there should be no run-time from using a separate netdev. Having the device is useful mostly for configuration, especially with the non-passthrough modes where you want to bind to a new mac address. Arnd