On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 07:23:13PM -0600, David Young wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 07:27:56PM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote:
> >
> > dhcpd, last I checked, used bpf and not sockets.
> >
> > If dhcpd is bpf, I would suggest reading the bpf_tap calls in the
> > driver. It could be that if_wm.c has a spurious on.
> >
> > If it's not, I don't know what's going on.
>
> I'll bet this has something to do with the hardware VLAN tagging. I
> don't think BPF groks the VLAN mbuf tags.
>
> FWIW, I think that hardware VLAN tagging is a lot of pain for no gain
> the way that NetBSD is doing it.
The last time I looked at this (on wm(4) with not-so-fast CPUs),
hardware vlan tagging had a small gain. Not much, but still measurable
--
Manuel Bouyer <bou...@antioche.eu.org>
NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--
