Hi Dave, David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 08/09/2007 03:31:37 AM:
> > What do you generally think of the patch/implementation ? :) > > We have two driver implementation paths on recieve and now > we'll have two on send, and that's not a good trend. Correct. > In an ideal world all the drivers would be NAPI and netif_rx() > would only be used by tunneling drivers and similar in the > protocol layers. And likewise all sends would go through > ->hard_start_xmit(). > > If you can come up with a long term strategy that gets rid of > the special transmit method, that'd be great. > > We should make Linux network drivers easy to write, not more difficult > by constantly adding most interfaces than we consolidate. I think that is a good top level view, and I agree with that. Patrick had suggested calling dev_hard_start_xmit() instead of conditionally calling the new API and to remove the new API entirely. The driver determines whether batching is required or not depending on (skb==NULL) or not. Would that approach be fine with this "single interface" goal ? Thanks, - KK _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
