Garrett D'Amore wrote: > Darren Reed wrote: > >> Garrett D'Amore wrote: >> >>> Hmm.... I seem to recall when I was looking at path optimizations in >>> Sitara, that a bit more clean up could be done in some hot paths if >>> the mblk carried the group indication in a bit rather than always >>> carrying the link layer header around. >>> >>> Have you given any thought to maybe *gasp* adding a bit or two to >>> the mblk with the IP header. If that were done, there are other >>> optimizations that would help the hot code path as well. >> >> >> >> Can you be more specific about where it is you're >> thinking that these flags could be stored and what >> their definition would mean for messages going >> up from IP (as IP would set them) as well as down >> from IP? > > > Actually, I'd like to see them going up _to_ up. I.e. set the bit in > the Nemo layer or device drivers.
That isn't this case and this case does nothing to prevent your suggestion from being taken up at a later point in time. This case is only looking at communication of the broadcast/multicast property from IP out to other code connected via pfhooks and can be adapted to use whatever signalling mechanism is used between IP and device drivers. Darren
