From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751870Ab2AYXSj (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:18:39 -0500 Received: from mail-iy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.210.174]:35863 "EHLO mail-iy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751319Ab2AYXSi convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:18:38 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20120124.230203.1478271172075708903.davem@davemloft.net> <20120125.165548.596418893115900979.davem@davemloft.net> Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 00:18:37 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [patch v4, kernel version 3.2.1] net/ipv4/ip_gre: Ethernet multipoint GRE over IP From: Dave Taht To: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?=A9tefan_Gula?= Cc: David Miller , jesse@nicira.com, joseph.glanville@orionvm.com.au, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, jmorris@namei.org, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, kaber@trash.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 2012/1/25 Štefan Gula : > 2012/1/25 David Miller : >> From: Jesse Gross >> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 23:11:06 -0800 >> >>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 8:02 PM, David Miller wrote: >>>> From: Joseph Glanville >>>> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:48:37 +1100 >>>> >>>>> The reason why this patch is useful is that it stands to be the only >>>>> true mulitpoint L2 VPN with a kernel space forwarding plane. >>>> >>>> So what you're telling me is that I added this huge openvswitch >>>> thing essentially for nothing? >>> >>> I think it's actually the opposite - Open vSwitch can be used to >>> implement this type of thing as well as for many other use cases. >> >> Then openvswitch is exactly where you should be prototyping and >> implementing support for this sort of stuff. >> >> And only if you cannot obtain reasonable performance using openvswitch >> should you be even entertaining the notion of a static implementation. >> >> That's the whole premise behind putting openvswitch into the tree, so >> that guys like you can play around in userspace without having to make >> any kernel changes at all. >> >> I am not applying these patches, the more things you say the more I am >> convinced they are not appropriate. >> > The performance is one of the most critical thing why I have chosen to > build kernel patch in the first place instead of some user-space app. I am very interested in testing this patch, for the kinds of environments I care about (embedded, cpe, etc) but I won't be able to get around to it for a week or so. I found the overall simplicity of this approach vs the complexity of the alternatives, appealing, and the performance numbers also. -- Dave Täht SKYPE: davetaht US Tel: 1-239-829-5608 FR Tel: 0638645374 http://www.bufferbloat.net