On Tue, Sep 30, 2003 at 09:10:54AM +0200, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Vincent Jardin writes: > >Le Mardi 30 Septembre 2003 03:03, Brooks Davis a écrit : > >> [Previously posted to -net in another form.] > >> > >> I propose to add an if_dev member to struct ifnet. It would be of type > >> device_t and be defined to point to the device for the interface or NULL > >> if there is no device (or if there was not an easy way to get access to > >> one). > >> > >> This change would codify the the relationship between an interface and > >> the underlying physical device. It also would get rid of the existing > >> abuses of if_name to look up the driver associated with an interface > >> and simplify a number of messy cases in the conversion from if_unit and > >> if_name to if_xname. > >> > >> Does this seem like a reasonable thing to do? > > > >Yes, if it helps to remove if_name/if_unit, it is a thing to do. Moreover it > >sounds a good idea to have the if_dev field into the ifnet structure. > > Somebody please explain how this would work for non-hardware > interfaces like if_loop, if_tun, if_tap etc ?
if_dev would be NULL when a device_t was not available. Code which used this feature would be required to either check that if_dev was non-NULL before trying to use it or have special knowldege that it only gets called with struct ifnet instances which have a non-NULL if_dev member. For instance, driver routines which take a struct ifnet would know that they are only called on their own ifnet so they could assume they had filled it in. -- 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
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
