From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 6 11:36:37 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org 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 9C4C416A420; Mon, 6 Feb 2006 11:36:37 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from yar@comp.chem.msu.su) Received: from comp.chem.msu.su (comp.chem.msu.su [158.250.32.97]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E07943D6B; Mon, 6 Feb 2006 11:36:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from yar@comp.chem.msu.su) Received: from comp.chem.msu.su (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by comp.chem.msu.su (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k16BaTa9027274; Mon, 6 Feb 2006 14:36:30 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from yar@comp.chem.msu.su) Received: (from yar@localhost) by comp.chem.msu.su (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id k16BaTb5027273; Mon, 6 Feb 2006 14:36:29 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from yar) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 14:36:29 +0300 From: Yar Tikhiy To: Max Laier Message-ID: <20060206113629.GF59508@comp.chem.msu.su> References: <20060201005658.A70005@xorpc.icir.org> <200602021437.38385.max@love2party.net> <200602041616.57224.max@love2party.net> <200602051824.28100.max@love2party.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200602051824.28100.max@love2party.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Hajimu UMEMOTO , Luigi Rizzo Subject: Re: if_bridge.ko requires INET6... X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 11:36:37 -0000 On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 06:24:20PM +0100, Max Laier wrote: > On Saturday 04 February 2006 16:16, Max Laier wrote: > > On Thursday 02 February 2006 14:37, Max Laier wrote: > > > On Thursday 02 February 2006 13:43, Yar Tikhiy wrote: > > > > > This needs to be fixed in pf then. > > > > > > > > Max Laier and I discussed this issue once, and Max had concern > > > > over possible performance degradation that might result from > > > > calling pflog functions through pointers to be set by a separate > > > > pflog module. We can skip touching the pf module in RELENG_6 for > > > > now and leave the issue to after 6.1-RELEASE is out. > > > > > > I have convinced myself that we should really use a function pointer > > > here. I will try to commit a sollution to HEAD over the weekend. If you > > > are MFC'ing the changes *now*, I'd appreciate if you could spare out pf, > > > but I am willing to MFC the changes before 6.1 if testing goes well. > > > > Here it is. I'd appreciate feedback. pflog_packet() uses a lot of complex > > types which makes it necessary to include pfvar.h. This is ugly, but I > > don't know how to work around this. > > FYI, just committed this to the tree. I'm sorry I was a bit too late with my remarks... -- Yar