From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MEK1B-0002u9-Dz
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:22:49 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MEK16-0002qW-QI
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:22:49 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=49828 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MEK16-0002qP-Hw
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:22:44 -0400
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:54476)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <gleb@redhat.com>) id 1MEK16-0005WU-1S
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:22:44 -0400
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:22:35 +0300
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 6/7] virtio-net: Add new RX filter
	controls
Message-ID: <20090610092235.GF15949@redhat.com>
References: <20090608192911.GA32168@redhat.com>
	<4A2D7CB6.5060101@codemonkey.ws> <20090609095701.GC1480@redhat.com>
	<20090609150012.GA3921@shareable.org>
	<4A2E82E8.6050209@siemens.com> <20090610084629.GB8614@redhat.com>
	<4A2F75C4.1010607@siemens.com> <20090610090759.GC8614@redhat.com>
	<20090610091321.GE15949@redhat.com>
	<20090610091755.GB6844@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20090610091755.GB6844@redhat.com>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@hp.com>

On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:17:55PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:13:21PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:07:59PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 10:58:44AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > > > Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 05:42:32PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > > > >> The same is true for PF_PACKET (or does libpcap actually use that
> > > > >> internally?). Haven't analyzed the reasons in details yet, but I bet
> > > > >> it's not solvable in user space.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Jan
> > > > > 
> > > > > I think you can load the veth module, and attach veth to a bridge.
> > > > 
> > > > Sorry, my brain is not yet working at full speed: What do we gain for
> > > > the initial problem that we want to bridge to an existing network device
> > > > without having to move management tools like dhcpcd to the corresponding
> > > > brX?
> > > > 
> > > > Jan
> > > 
> > > Nothing :). I was only saying that IIUC the problem is not with
> > > PF_PACKET itself - I think that PF_PACKET + veth can be used
> > > as a replacement for tap.
> > > 
> > And the point is...?
> 
> tap requires bridging, PF_PACKET can attach to a physical device.
> 
Why tap requires bridging? User requires bridging, so he uses bridge.
Look above, you wrote "I think you can load the veth module, and attach
veth to a bridge."

--
			Gleb.