From owner-freebsd-net Fri Nov 22 9:18:56 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C80B237B401 for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 09:18:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (xorpc.icir.org [192.150.187.68]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57D0543EA3 for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 09:18:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo@xorpc.icir.org) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id gAMHIoAh081717; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 09:18:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo@xorpc.icir.org) Received: (from rizzo@localhost) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id gAMHIomL081716; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 09:18:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo) Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 09:18:50 -0800 From: Luigi Rizzo To: John Polstra Cc: net@FreeBSD.ORG, sam@errno.com Subject: Re: CFR: MFC of mtags Message-ID: <20021122091850.A81622@xorpc.icir.org> References: <196301c291e9$56d25e70$52557f42@errno.com> <200211221645.gAMGjKPH082267@vashon.polstra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <200211221645.gAMGjKPH082267@vashon.polstra.com>; from jdp@polstra.com on Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 08:45:20AM -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org i am pretty sure that this change does not affect low level drivers; the "any software that uses them" comment almost surely refers to the m_aux field, not to the entire struct mbuf. This said, fair behaviour cannot be requested to one side only. Sam posted patches, so those who have the hw/sw for which they suspect incompatibilities have all the resources to try the new code and find out whether their suspicions are founded or not. I am surely willing to listen to objections based on convincing evidence of breakage, whereas pure speculation is a much weaker argument. cheers luigi On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 08:45:20AM -0800, John Polstra wrote: > In article <196301c291e9$56d25e70$52557f42@errno.com>, Sam Leffler > wrote: > > I want to commit the mbuf packet tag changes to stable. These > > changes replace the aux mbuf pointer in the mbuf with a list of > > "packet tags". This does not change the size of the mbuf structure > > but does affect any software that uses them (presently only KAME > > ipsec which has been patched to use packet tags instead). > > I would strongly prefer that you not put this into the 4.x branch. > The project has a policy against incompatible ABI changes within the > -stable branch. If you do this MFC then those of us who rely on > third-party binary-only network drivers (such as the ET Inc. drivers, > upon which I and many others rely for network connectivity) will be > SOL. Changing the ABI within the branch is unfair to the vendors who > try to maintain drivers for FreeBSD, and it only discourages them from > trying to support our operating system. Let's just let the 4.x branch > live out the rest of its life span in a compatible way. > > John > -- > John Polstra > John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA > "Disappointment is a good sign of basic intelligence." -- Chögyam Trungpa > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message