From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Greear Subject: Re: [PATCH] NET: Multiqueue network device support. Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 15:40:32 -0700 Message-ID: <466F20E0.8010901@candelatech.com> References: <20070612.140240.00078635.davem@davemloft.net> <466F0C92.5080306@garzik.org> <466F0D78.7090404@candelatech.com> <20070612.142658.45082832.davem@davemloft.net> <466F144A.3070809@candelatech.com> <466F1E6D.8070401@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, kaber@trash.net, hadi@cyberus.ca, peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@intel.com, auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com To: Jeff Garzik Return-path: Received: from ns2.lanforge.com ([66.165.47.211]:49862 "EHLO ns2.lanforge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752910AbXFLWk6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2007 18:40:58 -0400 In-Reply-To: <466F1E6D.8070401@garzik.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Jeff Garzik wrote: > Ben Greear wrote: >> That sounds plausible for many uses, but it may also be useful to have >> the virtual devices. Having 802.1Q VLANs be 'real' devices has worked >> out >> quite well, so I think there is a place for a 'mac-vlan' as well. > > Virtual devices are pretty much the only solution we have right now, > both in terms of available control points, and in terms of mapping to > similar existing solutions (like wireless and its multiple net devices). I believe Patrick is working on cleaning up mac-vlans and converting them to use the new netlink configuration API, so there should be a patch for these hitting the list shortly. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com