Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756698AbXKABb1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:31:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752988AbXKABbR (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:31:17 -0400 Received: from ns2.lanforge.com ([66.165.47.211]:48638 "EHLO ns2.lanforge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752454AbXKABbQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:31:16 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 1470 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:31:16 EDT Message-ID: <47292C5E.4050709@candelatech.com> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 18:31:10 -0700 From: Ben Greear Organization: Candela Technologies User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070301) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Hemminger CC: Dave Johnson , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Bin Guo Subject: Re: expected behavior of PF_PACKET on NETIF_F_HW_VLAN_RX device? References: <18216.52455.698606.497464@zeus.sw.starentnetworks.com> <20071031123359.3954befc@freepuppy.rosehill> <4729269A.6090606@candelatech.com> <47292A99.5070805@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <47292A99.5070805@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1214 Lines: 37 Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > The code in AF_PACKET should fix the skb before passing to user space > so that there is > no difference between accel and non-accel hardware. Internal choices > shouldn't > leak to user space. Ditto, the receive checksum offload should be > fixed up as well. Ok, I guess that will fix the sniffing issues and any user-space bridging type applications. Currently, VLAN devices offer the ability to 'reorder' the header and explicitly remove the VLAN header. I assume we keep this feature and have the AF_PACKET logic check the device flags to see if it should insert the VLAN header for hw-accel vlans? Either way, if we sniff the underlying device, we should always get the VLAN header. What about drivers and filtering VLANs? It seems there is still a difference between software vlans and hw-accel in this case. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/