On Fri, 2006-31-03 at 21:21 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > jamal wrote: > [..] > >I think thats a fine trade-off. The advantage of putting it in user > >space is its a lot easier to add newer features. The current STP - by > >virtue of being in the kernel - is missing a lot of newer developments. > > > > > There already exists a version of the new RSTP done on old version > of 2.4. It looks easier and better to just fix that and bring it up to date. >
It's a lot more than just RSTP or multi-RTSP or port-fast etc. I have lost track of the gazillion flavors/tweaks that CISCO alone puts out (most of which do sound reasonably useful). This is always the problem woith control protocols - they tend to be very feature rich over shorter periods of time. Again, i do believe we would have most if not all if things were not in the kernel. > The problem is you can't have a user space application lock the kernel. > But you can have a kernel thread grab a lock. ok; but why do you need to lock the kernel any differently than what we do to add/delete a classifier rule? The main thing you want to control in the kernel is the state transition after user space computes the tree behavior. cheers, jamal - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
