Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 14:32:22 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, Hiroki Sato <hrs@FreeBSD.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r272391 - in head/sys: netinet netinet6 Message-ID: <20141002103222.GG73266@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <542D09CF.5000803@FreeBSD.org> References: <201410020025.s920PvEW008958@svn.freebsd.org> <542D09CF.5000803@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 12:16:15PM +0400, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote: A> On 02.10.2014 04:25, Hiroki Sato wrote: A> > Author: hrs A> > Date: Thu Oct 2 00:25:57 2014 A> > New Revision: 272391 A> > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/272391 A> > A> > Log: A> > Add an additional routing table lookup when m->m_pkthdr.fibnum is changed A> > at a PFIL hook in ip{,6}_output(). IPFW setfib rule did not perform A> > a routing table lookup when the destination address was not changed. A> > A> > CR: D805 A> > A> > Modified: A> > head/sys/netinet/ip_output.c A> > head/sys/netinet6/ip6_output.c A> I'm not very happy with this. A> We already have large conditional for checking if dst has changed, how A> you have added another conditional for fib.. A> This idea is quite weird: why should we try to check all this stuff for A> every packet instead of asking pfil consumers A> to provide information they already know? A> A> We'd better discuss something like M_DSTCHANGED flag instead of doing A> these hacks. And here you suggest to abuse mbuf flags to merely carry return value of a pfil hook :) -- Totus tuus, Glebius.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20141002103222.GG73266>