Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 26 Oct 2012 15:24:42 +0200
From:      Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>
To:        "Andrey V. Elsukov" <ae@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>, src-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r242079 - in head: sbin/ipfw share/man/man4 sys/conf sys/net sys/netinet sys/netinet6 sys/netpfil/ipfw
Message-ID:  <508A8F1A.7020902@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <508A823A.30308@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <201210250939.q9P9dF0q022970@svn.freebsd.org> <508960C2.6030003@freebsd.org> <508967E3.3070508@FreeBSD.org> <5089A13F.8080405@freebsd.org> <20121026112629.GC70741@FreeBSD.org> <508A7762.1040106@freebsd.org> <508A823A.30308@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 26.10.2012 14:29, Andrey V. Elsukov wrote:
> On 26.10.2012 15:43, Andre Oppermann wrote:
>>> A> If you can show with your performance profiling that the sysctl
>>> A> isn't even necessary, you could leave it completely away and have
>>> A> pfil_forward enabled permanently.  That would be even better for
>>> A> everybody.
>>>
>>> I'd prefer to have the sysctl. Benchmarking will definitely show
>>> no regression, because in default case packets are tagless. But if
>>> packets would carry 1 or 2 tags each, which don't actually belong
>>> to PACKET_TAG_IPFORWARD, then processing would be pessimized.
>>
>> With M_FASTFWD_OURS I used an overlay of the protocol specific M_PROTO[1-5]
>> mbuf flags.  The same can be done with M_IPFORWARD.  The ipfw code then
>> will not only add the m_tag but also set M_IPFORWARD flag.  That way no
>> sysctl is required and the feature is always available.  The overlay
>> definition is in ip_var.h.
>
> It seems we have only one bit in the m_flags that can be used, so, maybe
> we left it to some things that can appear in the future?

That's what the M_PROTO flags are for:

#define	M_IPFW_FORWARD	M_PROTO2	/* ip forwarding */

of course you have to do the same for ip6.

The M_PROTO[1-5] flags are only valid within a protocol layer.  For
example they get cleared in ip_output() before the packet is handed
to layer 2.

-- 
Andre




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?508A8F1A.7020902>