| To: | Krzysztof Halasa <khc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: net packet queue scheduler, packet_type and proto handlers |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 21 Feb 2001 22:33:38 +0100 |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <m3ofvx4k3x.fsf@intrepid.pm.waw.pl>; from khc@intrepid.pm.waw.pl on Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 01:30:08PM +0100 |
| References: | <m3ofvx4k3x.fsf@intrepid.pm.waw.pl> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 01:30:08PM +0100, Krzysztof Halasa wrote:
>
> switch (skb->data[1]) {
> #ifdef CONFIG_INET
> case AX25_P_IP:
[...]
Ugh.
Looks like a bug in the AX25 layer.
> What do you think about this change? Does anything depend on the current
> behavior?
I think it's not nice to let the upper layer handle the retry in all cases,
although it's only needed in a few special cases. Using netif_rx for the
uncommon case of reexamining the packet is better, because you keep it out
of the fast path. I don't see the twice examining by taps as a problem,
it doesn't break anything as far as I know.
-Andi
--
This is like TV. I don't like TV.
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: usagi ipv6 and linux source, Andi Kleen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: 2.4 tcp very slow under certain circumstances (Re: netdev issues (3c905B)), Jordan Mendelson |
| Previous by Thread: | net packet queue scheduler, packet_type and proto handlers, Krzysztof Halasa |
| Next by Thread: | Re: net packet queue scheduler, packet_type and proto handlers, Krzysztof Halasa |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |