netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Why skbuff.h different for 2.4 and 2.6 kernels?

To: acme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Why skbuff.h different for 2.4 and 2.6 kernels?
From: linux lover <linux_lover2004@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 18:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=RbM4Onsq1kzEFhhgYtckTrZ6zY4Md033alU0iD/Onkjmhc1TnMoL+y3cYHNRrA9sTs9eZl304xb1shEJ0PtIrpgvZCQukZ+tsqlY8Be4mmbTtP8+dXbnqsuVTnkwMvDzyZcj07TXpkzmRCoaVA2yJn0jAwPCg5g1KP55HLnG+lI= ;
In-reply-to: 6667
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
Hello,
        Thanks for reply. Can you please tell me about
my second question?
      2)But Why header structures for ipcomp, eh,
esp(IPSEC) not included in skbuff.h?
 
regards,
linux_lover.

--- Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> On Apr 11, 2005 1:37 PM, linux lover
> <linux_lover2004@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > hello,
> > 1) In 2.4 kernel series skbuff.h has following
> unions
> > for each TCP/IP layer.
> 
> 
> >         union {
> >                 unsigned char   *raw;
> >         } mac;
> > 
> >  why mac union in 2.6 not have ethernet header?
> Also
> > spxhdr and ipxhdr structures are removed from nh
> and h
> > unions.
> 
> Work in progress, the ultimate goal is to get rid of
> all of these unions and
> have just:
> 
>         void *transport_header;
>         void *network_header;
>         void *link_header;
> 
> So just set mac.raw directly and cast it to the
> desired type.
> 
> - Arnaldo
> 


                
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>