Bruce M Simpson wrote:
Actually, I thought the change which moved the VLAN tag out of the mbuf
tag pool and into the mbuf packet header had also been MFCed. It has not.
It would be an API+ABI change to MFC it. That's why I haven't done it.
As CURRENT is the branch normally used for feature de
Actually, I thought the change which moved the VLAN tag out of the mbuf
tag pool and into the mbuf packet header had also been MFCed. It has not.
As CURRENT is the branch normally used for feature development it is
probably best I don't MFC this unless the VLAN tag change is MFCed also.
There
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 04:20:26PM +0100, Bruce M Simpson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone want to see these changes MFCed, or otherwise object to such
> an MFC?
> The introduction of M_PROMISC did the following:
>
>* Drop frames immediately if the interface is not marked IFF_UP.
>* Always t
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 04:20:26PM +0100, Bruce M Simpson wrote:
> For end users the main change of interest will be the ability for
> FreeBSD to receive 802.1p frames, even if it doesn't do anything with
> the priority fields right now.
>
> If I hear 'yeses' I will try to MFC this as time perm
Bruce M Simpson wrote:
Hi,
Does anyone want to see these changes MFCed, or otherwise object to such
an MFC?
The introduction of M_PROMISC did the following:
* Drop frames immediately if the interface is not marked IFF_UP.
ok
* Always trim off the frame checksum if present.
* Always
