* jamal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2006-06-29 20:48 > the ifb references it; only mirred redirects to the ifb at the moment. > You would need to increment in mirred, no? > Why do i feel i am missing something? ;->
The point is to avoid having an atomic operation for every packet when setting iif in netif_receive_skb(). If it was only for mirred nobody would complain I guess. > I think whether it becomes ifindex or pointer you need to increment the > refcounter. and decrement somewhere. > The challenge for me is a choice to use more cycles if you use ifindex > vs less cycles with a pointer. The advantage for going with ifindex > would be to save those bits(if you rearrange). The question is which is > reasonable?;-> The third choice is to just don't care if the interface goes away but have a chance to figure it out and just assume as if it would have never been set. The number of devices that can disappear w/o user control is very very limited and not worth an atomic operation for every single packet. - 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
