| To: | Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH, untested] Support for PPPOE on SMP |
| From: | Michal Ostrowski <mostrows@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | 25 Jun 2003 09:42:24 -0400 |
| Cc: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, Paul MacKerras <paulus@xxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, fcusack@xxxxxxxxx, "David F. Skoll" <dfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, James Carlson <carlson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <1056547262.1945.1436.camel@brick.watson.ibm.com> |
| References: | <20030625072602.529AF2C0B9@lists.samba.org> <1056547262.1945.1436.camel@brick.watson.ibm.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Perhaps instead of using a special queue that keeps packets ordered, we add a tag to each skb as it comes off the card and let higher level protocols use this to re-order things themselves? (And add some option for AF_PACKET sockets to optionally enforce this ordering in presenting packets to apps, or not.) This may require modifying all drivers, but it does provide for an explicit mechanism that can be made mandatory for drivers, avoids special casing, avoids dumping work onto a single CPU and leaves it up to the higher-level code to figure out ordering, if it wants to. -- Michal Ostrowski <mostrows@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH, untested] Support for PPPOE on SMP, Michal Ostrowski |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH, untested] Support for PPPOE on SMP, Jamal Hadi |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH, untested] Support for PPPOE on SMP, Michal Ostrowski |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH, untested] Support for PPPOE on SMP, Jamal Hadi |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |