From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E898BCA9EAF for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 02:47:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B459E2086D for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2019 02:47:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="bajvseEb" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730646AbfJVCrY (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Oct 2019 22:47:24 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-f195.google.com ([209.85.160.195]:41205 "EHLO mail-qt1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727264AbfJVCrY (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Oct 2019 22:47:24 -0400 Received: by mail-qt1-f195.google.com with SMTP id c17so21541300qtn.8; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:47:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WySvzBCFBCFgH/1a9rHbbdy4QdPGhs9C/obzdvRJ4F8=; b=bajvseEbSZD8pigLhE6CKu+zTmKT8LcvjqpD0pPHTveHvRHMeiC/dyJD59iv1SyKUS ySdHAM8olzWEAAG47lXhtbIA8+HZIkdHG4f2TrDBk+dn08BmsDqogomAvxdM7GP0/SHm SpJUr2A2wbwy8Wpd6jD3u59SS7WQgmOmMhFL0BYBvyN+6nvfvumZ8AIjulldN+l2lGvb ZjFIz5MN8wc6el4ZWvRs9ea3wWvM2wQ8po9v6+rK6bAeNnlAhtj16qsjxjZWhJAJaoiQ d2Zl5U8VUrix7rdJv9zGeqEEpZYwgZqL4WlXR0et1bWPcBC4psFFwfab1fR3p+NNrfOj E3Vw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=WySvzBCFBCFgH/1a9rHbbdy4QdPGhs9C/obzdvRJ4F8=; b=SIT9dXZx94sz22zNAvSqE3QeYv832MQmGd8wbj3hVv7n6gDoM6T6JAfUQsPticN1EZ hh6UVThtyn0YGdnTLzfBvJoIzZIvRXJ85qQEAMAwS+0o4GX4rw4MvDYwWNYkFivVHHF3 W5Zk2mAvKxZj4rMkhGqL1/ZDZ3ApBUVQuD61n9tCQiW3bUSwdaqlGDvv1QEAyIfnQ1YH bfYJc3kxyZCKYMJEsQGWj6HTr872YNNBnaPohUG1koVmWYz8H69jAV8ZrEISJoxgqNxe rxL3/Na7V91oKThiaEOpybgQvDRVYKfV+5wshc8BKyPd4Gd6yiWyIcqJ43ybH20LbZ2l eDBQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUuVqEMGTpTMVIdOQjyO8bqplY/tAt9DUepE/rfyb4tbBgk4hVJ mm1bif+1WvcXyxTxvski2v5k4dz1 X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzwIQTymyXYjfJ8y3Y79B0B6+mp6XzYeRvdVEK8KHjz1tRCly/2dnIIW5lIZCK6geyHbo/GGw== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:359d:: with SMTP id k29mr1043887qtb.96.1571712442839; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:47:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dahern-DO-MB.local ([2601:282:800:fd80:b912:7de9:ffc9:d1c]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id r1sm9780610qti.4.2019.10.21.19.47.19 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:47:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] net: vlan: reverse 4 bytes of vlan header when setting initial MTU To: Yunsheng Lin , Stephen Hemminger Cc: davem@davemloft.net, jiri@mellanox.com, allison@lohutok.net, mmanning@vyatta.att-mail.com, petrm@mellanox.com, dcaratti@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1571660763-117936-1-git-send-email-linyunsheng@huawei.com> <20191021162751.1ccb251e@hermes.lan> From: David Ahern Message-ID: <3c79d203-33e9-11dc-939d-3cecd707eb40@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 20:47:17 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/21/19 7:31 PM, Yunsheng Lin wrote: > Or we just leave it as it is, and expect user to manually configure the MTU > of vlan netdev to the MTU of thelower device minus vlan header when the > performace in the above case is a concern to user? > for now, I would think so. vlan on a vxlan device ... you are going after q-in-q'ish with vxlan? that can not be a common deployment.