On 10 October 2016 at 10:56, Mark Kettenis <[email protected]> wrote: >> Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 13:48:18 +1000 >> From: David Gwynne <[email protected]> >> >> if the arch can cope with prepending on an unaligned address in >> vxlan, then let it do it. >> >> this means less work if we can get away with it. >> >> ok? > > Let's face it. The vxlan protocol is badly designed. Should we > really create multiple code paths for strict-align and > non-strict-align architectures? Is vxlan really used in > performance-critical setups? >
Definitely. <lighthearted-sarcasm>Unlike strict alignment archs (-;</lighthearted-sarcasm>
