From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 31 20:42:18 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B9BA16A4DD; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 20:42:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from athena.softcardsystems.com (mail.softcardsystems.com [12.34.136.114]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A09E43D46; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 20:42:18 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sah@softcardsystems.com) Received: from athena (athena [12.34.136.114])i7VLg9cI008597; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:42:10 -0500 Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:42:09 -0500 (EST) From: Sam X-X-Sender: sah@athena To: Brooks Davis In-Reply-To: <20040831203929.GB25134@odin.ac.hmc.edu> Message-ID: References: <4134DF35.7070605@freebsd.org> <20040831203929.GB25134@odin.ac.hmc.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed cc: Scott Long cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: option directive and turning on AOE X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 20:42:18 -0000 OK, once i get it up I'll look into these other avenues to see if they're a cleaner approach. On Tue, 31 Aug 2004, Brooks Davis wrote: > On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 02:27:33PM -0600, Scott Long wrote: >> Sam wrote: >> >>> I've added code to if_ethersubr.c:/ether_demux/ >>> to queue up AoE frames as they appear. I followed >>> suit with other protocols and included my addition >>> inside of an #ifdef AOE. Where do I turn this on? >>> I thought perhaps just adding an 'option AOE' to >>> the config would do it, but it doesn't -- so clearly >>> I don't understand how the option directive works. >>> The config man page doesn't talk about option/device >>> directives ... >>> >>> I'm still looking, but a clue would be well received. >> >> Did you modify /sys/conf/options to tell it about your >> AOE option? If so, then you should have specified the name >> of a header file that the option would be #define'd into. >> Include that header file in if_ethersubr.c and you should >> have no problems. >> >> Incidentally, this might be an area when netgraph would be >> useful. Instead of having an AoE specific hook in the >> stack, you could have an AoE netgraph module that uses the >> existing netgraph hooks. It's just an idea, though. > > Another option might be a PFIL hook. There isn't one there now, but I > think I've seen talk of adding one. Actually, if we did that, we could > get most of the netgraph specific hooks out of the ethernet code. > > -- Brooks > > -- > Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE. > PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4 >