On Oct 2, 2011 4:44 AM, "Joseph Glanville" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > I am exploring creating a new vport type for a zeroconf virtual network (similar to a multicast GRE tunnel) > So far I have reviewed most of the kernel module code and have worked out how to create a new vport (adding to vport.c struct, defining vport in vport.h and creating vport-newport.c) but when reviewing vport-gre.c I noticed tunnel.c/.h which seems to be all of the IP resolution, transmission stuff etc. > > My new vport will probably be using Infinband ibverbs rather than IP as the transport network for tunneled packets. > Would it be better to extend tunnel.c to handle native Infinband and define a new protocol IB_<type> in tunnel.h or just build everything into vport-newport.c?
I wouldn't just dump a bunch of Infiband stuff in tunnel.c since it's already overgrown. At some point it will need to be split apart for IPv6 into v4, v6, and common code. Maybe the time for that is now and Infiniband can be one of those categories. It depends on how much common code there is. If it's completely different then maybe it makes sense to keep it contained in the new vport.
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
