> As an aside, this design does support using STREAMS to capture > packets quite neatly as it allows complete packets to be queued up > on the queue, awaiting their turn on the CPU, while packets are > delivered to sockets simultaneously. But for many packets, the copy > is made, given to the promiscuous handler and then the original is > freed because it doesn't have a local destination.
Could you expand on where you see that? My read of i_dls_link_rx_common() is that if there's only one matching dls_impl_t (the promiscuous listener), the fdi_rx logic will skip the copy. One question I've long had on this code is why we use copymsg() rather than dupmsg(). -- meem _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
