From owner-freebsd-net  Wed May 20 02:36:32 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA28055
          for freebsd-net-outgoing; Wed, 20 May 1998 02:36:32 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from labinfo.iet.unipi.it (labinfo.iet.unipi.it [131.114.9.5])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id CAA27802
          for <net@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 20 May 1998 02:35:22 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it)
Received: from localhost (luigi@localhost) by labinfo.iet.unipi.it (8.6.5/8.6.5) id JAA11403; Wed, 20 May 1998 09:51:04 +0200
From: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
Message-Id: <199805200751.JAA11403@labinfo.iet.unipi.it>
Subject: Re: struct ifnet handling...
To: eivind@yes.no (Eivind Eklund)
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 09:51:04 +0200 (MET DST)
Cc: kjc@csl.sony.co.jp, net@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <19980520001008.55413@follo.net> from "Eivind Eklund" at May 20, 98 00:09:49 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

> > but "chains" can be emulated with relative ease and efficiency
> > using optimized SKIPTO instructions.
> 
> Are you talking about automatically or by the user?  If you're talking

the "otimization" i am talking about is replacing rule numbers with
pointers so that there is no need to scan the whole database each time.
This is done automatically in my code, and the user knows nothing about
it.

I am not considering more sophisticated optimizations like 'hmmm this
test was done earlier so let's just skip it'.

	cheers
	luigi

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message