On Thu, 2013-11-21 at 06:24 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-11-21 at 14:08 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-11-21 at 14:05 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> >
> > > @@ -498,7 +500,8 @@ struct sk_buff {
> > > * headers if needed
> > > */
> > > __u8 encapsulation:1;
> > > - /* 7/9 bit hole (depending on ndisc_nodetype presence) */
> > > + __u8 drop_unicast:1;
> >
> > The obvious question is here, and for IPv4/IPv6 - should the wireless
> > stack be responsible for doing this instead?
>
> I don't really like the idea of reserving a bit for this in sk_buff,
> and propagate it in every cloning ...
>
> Someone should replace __copy_skb_header() by a single memset(),
> because copying all these bits one by one is not really clever.
>
> And then, adding a test in fast path (ip_rcv_finish()) is really not
> nice.
Yeah, that was a concern too. I'll do it entirely in the wireless stack
instead I guess. At least it'll be hidden away inside the if that
already does the group key check etc.
Thanks.
johannes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
