Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:15:49AM CEST, da...@davemloft.net wrote:
>From: Jiri Pirko
>Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 09:46:12 +0200
>
>> You are probably right. I'm not sure how to handle this correctly
>> though. Adding some hard limit number might not be correct.
>
>I would just use a hard limit of
From: Jiri Pirko
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 09:46:12 +0200
> You are probably right. I'm not sure how to handle this correctly
> though. Adding some hard limit number might not be correct.
I would just use a hard limit of something like 8 for now, and if we
need to expand this limit we can consider
From: Ben Hutchings
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 23:33:44 +0100
> I think we will also need to limit the depth of the device stack so we
> don't run out of stack space here. __netif_receive() implements a kind
> of tail recursion whenever a packet is passed up, but
> __netdev_has_upper_dev() can't
Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 12:33:44AM CEST, bhutchi...@solarflare.com wrote:
>On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 17:05 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> This lists are supposed to serve for storing pointers to all upper devices.
>> Eventually it will replace dev->master pointer which is used for
>> bonding, bridge, team
Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 12:33:44AM CEST, bhutchi...@solarflare.com wrote:
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 17:05 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
This lists are supposed to serve for storing pointers to all upper devices.
Eventually it will replace dev-master pointer which is used for
bonding, bridge, team but it
From: Ben Hutchings bhutchi...@solarflare.com
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 23:33:44 +0100
I think we will also need to limit the depth of the device stack so we
don't run out of stack space here. __netif_receive() implements a kind
of tail recursion whenever a packet is passed up, but
From: Jiri Pirko j...@resnulli.us
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 09:46:12 +0200
You are probably right. I'm not sure how to handle this correctly
though. Adding some hard limit number might not be correct.
I would just use a hard limit of something like 8 for now, and if we
need to expand this limit
Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:15:49AM CEST, da...@davemloft.net wrote:
From: Jiri Pirko j...@resnulli.us
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 09:46:12 +0200
You are probably right. I'm not sure how to handle this correctly
though. Adding some hard limit number might not be correct.
I would just use a hard limit
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 23:33:44 +0100
Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 17:05 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> > This lists are supposed to serve for storing pointers to all upper devices.
> > Eventually it will replace dev->master pointer which is used for
> > bonding, bridge, team but it
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 17:05 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> This lists are supposed to serve for storing pointers to all upper devices.
> Eventually it will replace dev->master pointer which is used for
> bonding, bridge, team but it cannot be used for vlan, macvlan where
> there might be multiple
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 17:05 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
This lists are supposed to serve for storing pointers to all upper devices.
Eventually it will replace dev-master pointer which is used for
bonding, bridge, team but it cannot be used for vlan, macvlan where
there might be multiple upper
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 23:33:44 +0100
Ben Hutchings bhutchi...@solarflare.com wrote:
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 17:05 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
This lists are supposed to serve for storing pointers to all upper devices.
Eventually it will replace dev-master pointer which is used for
bonding,
12 matches
Mail list logo
