Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 15:35:06 -0400 From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> To: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/bge if_bge.c Message-ID: <200609191535.08184.jkim@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20060919190449.GC720@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> References: <200609182218.k8IMIMUT059300@repoman.freebsd.org> <200609191431.01649.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <20060919190449.GC720@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 19 September 2006 03:04 pm, Peter Jeremy wrote: > On Tue, 2006-Sep-19 14:30:59 -0400, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > >On Tuesday 19 September 2006 01:52 pm, John Baldwin wrote: > >> Which I'm about to kill hopefully. Please let's fix this the > >> right way and not hack it any further. > > > >Sure, no problem. But I don't think we can DTRT on -STABLE > > without breaking API. Can we? > > I've had a quick look into this problem because I extensively use > VLANs on a bge and discovered that I no longer have VLAN tag > details (which makes packet tracing a nuisance). > > As far as I can see, there is nothing preventing bpf_tap() and > bpf_mtap2() being doctored to undo the VLAN detagging so that > bpf_filter() is passed a mbuf chain that looks like an 802.1Q > ethernet frame: Dummy up an mbuf (as bpf_mtap2() does) that > contains the MAC addresses from the incoming data followed by > the 802.1Q packet type and tag information, with m_next pointing > to the byte after the MAC addresses in the original data. Why don't we just fake it up from ether_input() and pass it to BPF_MTAP() instead of 'teaching' bpf? I think it is more logical thing to do. Jung-uk Kim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200609191535.08184.jkim>