Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 19:01:45 -0400 From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> To: "Christian S.J. Peron" <csjp@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/bge if_bge.c Message-ID: <200609181901.47414.jkim@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <450F1EC1.4060106@FreeBSD.org> References: <200609182218.k8IMIMUT059300@repoman.freebsd.org> <450F1EC1.4060106@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 18 September 2006 06:33 pm, Christian S.J. Peron wrote: > Jung-uk Kim wrote: > > jkim 2006-09-18 22:18:22 UTC > > > > FreeBSD src repository > > > > Modified files: > > sys/dev/bge if_bge.c > > Log: > > Do not strip VLAN tag in promiscuous mode. > > > > Revision Changes Path > > 1.148 +28 -15 src/sys/dev/bge/if_bge.c > > I don't think this is right. An interface does not have to be in > promiscuous mode in order to have BPF peers attached to it. If this > is being done to ensure that vlan info is preserved for things like > tcpdump, the correct fix is to use bpf_peers_present() instead. Yes, I know that. This is just a stopgap until we have 'correct' fix. BTW, I am just following bad example, i.e., em(4). ;-) > This issue has been discussed between myself, jhb, and andre for a > couple of days now. The correct fix is to teach bpf to look at the > mbuf and re-construct and insert the vlan tags before passing it > through bpf_filter (and on to any peers), assuming the hardware is > handling stripping and inserting vlan tags. I have agreed to work > on this, time permitting. It's good to hear that somebody is working on it. Thanks! Jung-uk Kim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200609181901.47414.jkim>