Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 16 Sep 2005 16:34:21 +0400
From:      Yar Tikhiy <yar@comp.chem.msu.su>
To:        Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/net if_vlan.c
Message-ID:  <20050916123421.GB23109@comp.chem.msu.su>
In-Reply-To: <20050916115312.GT53891@cell.sick.ru>
References:  <200509161144.j8GBihiM082730@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050916115312.GT53891@cell.sick.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 03:53:12PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 11:44:43AM +0000, Yar Tikhiy wrote:
> Y> yar         2005-09-16 11:44:43 UTC
> Y> 
> Y>   FreeBSD src repository
> Y> 
> Y>   Modified files:
> Y>     sys/net              if_vlan.c 
> Y>   Log:
> Y>   Test the new M_VLANTAG packet flag before calling
> Y>   m_tag_locate().  This adds little overhead of a simple
> Y>   bitwise operation in case hardware VLAN acceleration
> Y>   is on, yet saves the more expensive function call if
> Y>   the acceleration is off.
> Y>   
> Y>   Reviewed by:    ru, glebius
> Y>   X-MFC-after:    6.0
>      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 			Why?

'Cause it's more about code consistency than stability, or performance,
or features.  So I'd rather not bother re@ with this when they are
being flooded with really important bugfixes.  It shouldn't be the
extra m_tag_locate() call that is likely to be a bottleneck in 6.0 ;)

-- 
Yar



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050916123421.GB23109>