RE: [patch] A more general way to hook into the rx path.

From: Eble, Dan (DanE@aiinet.com)
Date: Mon Feb 03 2003 - 09:38:52 EST


David S. Miller wrote:
>
> > Can't they do that already? For example,
>
> The existing hook is only useful for the bridging,
> the proposed new hook was generic and useful for other
> applications.

Here's what I see in the current code:

        if (skb->dev->br_port && br_handle_frame_hook) {
                ... call the hook ...
        }

I don't see anything that guarantees that br_port and br_handle_frame_hook
actually point to the things their names suggest (as I tried to show in my
previous example). What have I missed? How does the current code enforce
that it is used for bridging only? If you would kindly point out which
safeguards my patch eliminates, I would be happy to put them back in. (My
application is bridge-like, and not a "proprietary TCP stack", so it would
not suffer from such restrictions.)

Thanks,

-- 
Dan Eble <dane@aiinet.com>  _____  .
                           |  _  |/|
Applied Innovation Inc.    | |_| | |
http://www.aiinet.com/     |__/|_|_|
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 07 2003 - 22:00:00 EST