Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 21:48:21 +1200 From: Matthew Luckie <mjl@luckie.org.nz> To: Bruce M Simpson <bms@spc.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bpf writes on tun device Message-ID: <42A81065.8010603@luckie.org.nz> In-Reply-To: <20050607112340.GC812@empiric.icir.org> References: <4295A6CA.8080409@luckie.org.nz> <20050606081637.GA73886@lycra.luckie.org.nz> <20050606120851.GD734@empiric.icir.org> <20050606204008.GA91353@lycra.luckie.org.nz> <20050607101927.GA99034@lycra.luckie.org.nz> <20050607112340.GC812@empiric.icir.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I'd suggest a name like DLT_PSEUDO might be better -- it may be helpful to > get review for the change from the NetBSD and OpenBSD guys too, as well as > the tcpdump.org guys. I posted a patch to netbsd tech-kern and have had positive feedback: http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-net/2005/06/09/0003.html I posted to tcpdump-workers and have had no response at this time: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=tcpdump-workers&m=111818619022560&w=2 I do, however, feel that this is a safe patch to apply, and one that I'd really like to see make it to 6.0. > Looking at style, it might be better if the driver(s) were changed to > explicitly use a 32-bit wide int type such as u_int32_t for the address > family header field in their bpfattach() calls. ICHDRLEN is odd man out, > but it is #define'd to be the same thing; I would update it there also. I'll do some house keeping on the patch and then re-send it. I take it a PR is the right place to send the patch? > A white space pass should probably also be done last thing to be sure. > I have no idea about ng_sppp.c I'm afraid. I'll make a note in the PR about ng_sppp.c; but there does not appear to be any output function specific to ng_sppp so I think it is safe to leave alone. Thanks Matthew
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42A81065.8010603>