Subject: Re: Dynamic registry of ehternet frame types
To: Jason Thorpe <email@example.com>
From: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/12/2003 16:54:08
> On Nov 11, 2003, at 11:49 PM, Martin Husemann wrote:
> > This has the additional advantage that it enables LKMs to register and
> > handler
> > additional ethernet frame types. It would not affect the efficiency of
> > hardwired frame types.
> > Do you think this is worth the effort?
> Yes. I would actually like to see the entire input path use
> dynamically-registered handlers, and eliminate that big switch
> statement entirely.
In that case some performance measurements is required, so that
an implementation won't give any penalty.
But yes, if it won't hurt performance it is really a good idea.