On Thu, 2006-15-06 at 10:47 +1000, Russell Stuart wrote: > On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 11:57 +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > The other problem I see with this code is it is very tightly tied to ATM > > cell sizes, not to solving the generic question of packetisation. > > Others have made this point also. I can't speak for Jesper, > but I did consider making it generic. The issue was that > doing so would add more code, but I don't personally know > of any real world situation that would use the generic > solution. I didn't fancy the thought of arguing on these > lists for code that no one would actually use. > > If someone could put up their hand and say "Hey, I need > this," then expanding the patch to accommodate them would > be a pleasure. I like generic code too. >
It is probably doable by just looking at netdevice->type and figuring the link layer technology. Totally in user space and building the compensated for tables there before telling the kernel (advantage is no kernel changes and therefore it would work with older kernels as well). cheers, jamal - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
