2018-04-11 20:43 GMT+02:00 Alexei Starovoitov <a...@fb.com>: > On 4/11/18 5:17 AM, Björn Töpel wrote: >> >> >> In the current RFC you are required to create both an Rx and Tx >> queue to bind the socket, which is just weird for your "Rx on one >> device, Tx to another" scenario. I'll fix that in the next RFC. > > I would defer on adding new features until the key functionality > lands. imo it's in good shape and I would submit it without RFC tag > as soon as net-next reopens.
Yes, makes sense. We're doing some ptr_ring-like vs head/tail measurements, and depending on the result we'll send out a proper patch when net-next is open again. What tree should we target -- bpf-next or net-next? Thanks! Björn
