From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 31 22:46:25 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BC6316A4CE; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:46:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D499843D58; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:46:24 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Received: from [192.168.0.12] (g4.samsco.home [192.168.0.12]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i7VMk1PT073300; Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:46:01 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <4134FF74.4010105@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 16:45:08 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040514 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andre Oppermann References: <4134DF35.7070605@freebsd.org> <20040831203929.GB25134@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <4134E4B6.2030409@elischer.org> <4134FCAE.7374599A@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <4134FCAE.7374599A@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=3.8 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on pooker.samsco.org cc: Sam cc: Julian Elischer cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: option directive and turning on AOE X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:46:25 -0000 Andre Oppermann wrote: > Julian Elischer wrote: > >>Brooks Davis wrote: >> >> >>>On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 02:27:33PM -0600, Scott Long wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Sam wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>I've added code to if_ethersubr.c:/ether_demux/ >>>>>to queue up AoE frames as they appear. I followed >>>>>suit with other protocols and included my addition >>>>>inside of an #ifdef AOE. Where do I turn this on? >>>>>I thought perhaps just adding an 'option AOE' to >>>>>the config would do it, but it doesn't -- so clearly >>>>>I don't understand how the option directive works. >>>>>The config man page doesn't talk about option/device >>>>>directives ... >>>>> >>>>>I'm still looking, but a clue would be well received. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>Did you modify /sys/conf/options to tell it about your >>>>AOE option? If so, then you should have specified the name >>>>of a header file that the option would be #define'd into. >>>>Include that header file in if_ethersubr.c and you should >>>>have no problems. >>>> >>>>Incidentally, this might be an area when netgraph would be >>>>useful. Instead of having an AoE specific hook in the >>>>stack, you could have an AoE netgraph module that uses the >>>>existing netgraph hooks. It's just an idea, though. >>>> >>>> >>> >>>Another option might be a PFIL hook. There isn't one there now, but I >>>think I've seen talk of adding one. Actually, if we did that, we could >>>get most of the netgraph specific hooks out of the ethernet code. >>> >> >>or visa versa.. >>make pfil have a netgraph hook. then you could use it to filter all >>kinds of things in netgraph graphs. > > > Yea, a ng_pfilhook module should be fairly easy to write. I don't like > it the other way around. PFIL_HOOKS is a hooking mechanism, so something > should hook itself in there. > > PS: I'm thinking about moving all the IPSec cruft in IPv4 into a pfil > hook. Thus IPSecKAME and FastIPSec could be loadable modules and it > would relieve ip_input/output.c by some more 1000's of lines. Haven't > looked fully into it yet though. I'm sure there are some difficulties > hidden somewhere. ;-) > Having a single common interface is definitely attractive, but there are performance and locking issues with the Netgraph framework that should probably be resolved first. Scott