From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: MACVLANs really best solution? How about a bridge with multiple bridge virtual interfaces? Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 14:17:23 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20090307211527.6e76d0b9.nanog@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org> <49B51A42.6050507@trash.net> <49B52F73.7010508@trash.net> <49B53B6C.7060400@trash.net> <49B5478C.4020001@trash.net> <49B566DF.3040603@candelatech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Patrick McHardy , Mark Smith , David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, shemminger@linux-foundation.org To: Ben Greear Return-path: Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:57210 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753846AbZCIVRd (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Mar 2009 17:17:33 -0400 In-Reply-To: <49B566DF.3040603@candelatech.com> (Ben Greear's message of "Mon\, 09 Mar 2009 11\:58\:39 -0700") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Ben Greear writes: > Patrick McHardy wrote: > >>> Now that I think about it we could call ndo_start_xmit directly >>> from the macvlan code, and bypass whatever hook we use to >>> intercept packets going out the normal device it should not >>> be too difficult. >> >> We don't intercept packets on TX, they have to be explicitly delivered >> to macvlan. > > It might suck for performance, but mac-vlan could register an 'ALL' protocol > on the physical dev, similar to tcp-dump, to grab pkts on tx and pass the > ones it cares about back up to the vlans? I like that idea. At least for prototyping. I wonder if pkt_type all could be have a per interface optimized variant. > I'd want run-time control to disable any of these costly options for those that > don't need it, however. If well implemented it should not be more expensive than the ingress path where we already have, and where we already do that. Unless your traffic is highly assymmetric. Eric