Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 Oct 2002 16:16:45 -0700 | From | Ben Greear <> | Subject | Re: feature request - why not make netif_rx() a pointer? |
| |
David S. Miller wrote: > On Tue, 2002-10-22 at 14:15, Matti Aarnio wrote: > >> ftp://zmailer.org/linux/netif_rx.patch > > > Please EXPORT_GPL this, if you are going to do it at all. > > Only non-GPL compliant binary-modules can result from this > change. > > People can easily do things like implement their own entire > networking stack with this hook, which is not what we want nor > is it allowed.
Don't assume we all want what you want.
As for allowed, it can be worked around fairly easily by removing all protocol handlers and then registering only yourself as the proprietary protocol handler, and gobble all packets. Sure, it's a bit of a kludge, and will have the various crufts (like the gettimeofday code) in there, but it will basically allow you to replace the entire stack.
If I'm right about that, then what is the difference between replacing the stack like that and replacing the netif_rx method entirely?
Ben
> > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >
-- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> <Ben_Greear AT excite.com> President of Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ScryMUD: http://scry.wanfear.com http://scry.wanfear.com/~greear
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |