From owner-cvs-all Thu Sep 12 0:24:56 2002 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 141EC37B400; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 00:24:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from baraca.united.net.ua (ns.united.net.ua [193.111.8.193]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8239143E42; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 00:24:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from vega.vega.com (xDSL-2-2.united.net.ua [193.111.9.226]) by baraca.united.net.ua (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g8C7Ock56870; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 10:24:39 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from FreeBSD.org (big_brother.vega.com [192.168.1.1]) by vega.vega.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id g8C7Oh1X011894; Thu, 12 Sep 2002 10:24:43 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <3D804187.512BE49C@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 10:25:59 +0300 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Vega International Capital X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.8 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,uk,ru MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Munechika Sumikawa Cc: brooks@one-eyed-alien.net, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/net if_gif.c if_gif.h References: <200209051535.g85FZdq2038989@freefall.freebsd.org> <20020905094452.A3044@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> <20020912.154452.47469593.sumikawa@ebina.hitachi.co.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Munechika Sumikawa wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 08:35:39AM -0700, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > > > sobomax 2002/09/05 08:35:39 PDT > > > > > > Modified files: > > > sys/net if_gif.c if_gif.h > > > Log: > > > Make recursion prevention variable per-instance and remove XXX comment > > > about thread-unsafety. > > > > Good solution. > > > > On minor issue. This changes the meaning of max_gif_nesting. Before it > > was the number of gif over gif tunnels you could nest. Now it's > > the number of times you can traverse the same tunnel while routing > > a packet. I'm not sure it makes any sense for it to be tunable any more. > > 1. it's still thread unsafe when two different threads use same gif > tunnel. Ok, good point - I'll add /* XXX */ back. > 2. As Brooks said, when several tunnel are nested for example gif0 -> > gif1 -> gif2 -> gif0, it's not counted rightly. Why not? The packet will be dropped down after the second attempt to enter gif0. To me it makes more sense than dropping it down in gif1. -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message