On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Mahesh Bandewar wrote:
>> The more subsystems involves, the more struct net pointers you
>> potentially need to touch, the less likely you can make it correct
>> by just switching skb->dev.
>
> Please drop that prejudice and read the patch-set carefully. I'm
> neit
On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 9:37 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Mahesh Bandewar wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately we don't have a way to switch to ns after L3 processing.
>
> I am totally aware of this, this is exactly why I said this might not be easy.
>
> The question is how hard it
+ Eric B.
Le 08/03/2016 06:37, Cong Wang a écrit :
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Mahesh Bandewar wrote:
Unfortunately we don't have a way to switch to ns after L3 processing.
I am totally aware of this, this is exactly why I said this might not be easy.
The question is how hard it is to
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Mahesh Bandewar wrote:
>
> Unfortunately we don't have a way to switch to ns after L3 processing.
I am totally aware of this, this is exactly why I said this might not be easy.
The question is how hard it is to implement one? My gut feeling is we only
need to chan
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Mahesh Bandewar wrote:
> As you mentioned logically we should be able to pass the skb in master's
> ns
> until L3 processing is completed. This patch series attempts to do that by
> disassociating t
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Mahesh Bandewar wrote:
As you mentioned logically we should be able to pass the skb in master's
ns
until L3 processing is completed. This patch series attempts to do that by
disassociating this logic from skb->dev and adding it to l3_dev. This
>>
>>> As you mentioned logically we should be able to pass the skb in master's
>>> ns
>>> until L3 processing is completed. This patch series attempts to do that by
>>> disassociating this logic from skb->dev and adding it to l3_dev. This
>>> should
>>> include not just IPT but all that is done in L3
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Mahesh Bandewar wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Mahesh Bandewar wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 8:45 PM, Cong Wang
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Mahesh Bandewar
>> > wrote:
>> > > From: Mahesh Bandewar
>> > >
>> > > netif_
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 8:45 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Mahesh Bandewar wrote:
> > From: Mahesh Bandewar
> >
> > netif_receive_skb_core() dispatcher uses skb->dev device to send it
> > to the packet-handlers (e.g. ip_rcv, ipv6_rcv etc). These packet
> > handlers int
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Mahesh Bandewar wrote:
> From: Mahesh Bandewar
>
> netif_receive_skb_core() dispatcher uses skb->dev device to send it
> to the packet-handlers (e.g. ip_rcv, ipv6_rcv etc). These packet
> handlers intern use the device passed to determine the net-ns to
> further p
From: Mahesh Bandewar
netif_receive_skb_core() dispatcher uses skb->dev device to send it
to the packet-handlers (e.g. ip_rcv, ipv6_rcv etc). These packet
handlers intern use the device passed to determine the net-ns to
further process these packets. Now with the nomination logic, the
dispatcher
11 matches
Mail list logo
