From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Greear Subject: Re: [RFC VLAN 00/10]: VLAN netlink support try 2 Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 09:25:40 -0700 Message-ID: <46658E84.1090301@candelatech.com> References: <20070605143650.23717.91261.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Patrick McHardy Return-path: Received: from ns2.lanforge.com ([66.165.47.211]:56772 "EHLO ns2.lanforge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760229AbXFEQZl (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2007 12:25:41 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070605143650.23717.91261.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Patrick McHardy wrote: > The last VLAN patchset was outdated, sorry about the mixup. These are the > correct patches. The iproute patch I posted was correct, so no repost of > that one. > > Is there any significant performance penalty in creating VLANs using these patches? If you have a test station handy, could you let us know what 'time' shows for a script creating 4000 VLANs with the old vconfig/ioctl method v/s this new method? I'll try to look through the rest of the patches in detail later today. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com