On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 09:14:08AM +0100, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:22:33 +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
+static int bat_v_elp_packet_recv(struct sk_buff *skb,
struct hard_iface *if_incoming)+{
- struct bat_priv *bat_priv = netdev_priv(if_incoming->soft_iface);
- struct batman_elp_packet *elp_packet;
- struct hard_iface *primary_if;
- struct ethhdr *ethhdr;
- bool ret;
- ret = check_management_packet(skb, if_incoming, BATMAN_ELP_HLEN);
- if (!ret)
return NET_RX_DROP;- /* did we receive a B.A.T.M.A.N. V ELP packet on an interface
* that does not have B.A.T.M.A.N. V ELP enabled ? */- if (bat_priv->bat_algo_ops->bat_ogm_emit != bat_v_ogm_emit)
return NET_RX_DROP;Hi Marek
I've not looked at the code, but i assume this can happen because there is not a per algorithm receive handler? Maybe it makes sense to have a receive handler in algo structure, which can handle per algorithm receive functions? The common PDUs can be handled first and then a call into the algo receive function made to dispatch algo specific PDUs.
Does this mean that you want to support multiple algorithms at the same time? I don't think it is a good idea..
I'm assuming the choice of algorithm is linked to the soft interface, i.e, bat0 could be using a different algorithm to bat1. So i think multiple algorithms are possible at the same time.
I have been thinking about this a bit more, and also about this bit of code:
+ elp_packet = (struct batman_elp_packet *)skb_push(hard_iface->elp_skb, + BATMAN_ELP_HLEN); + memset(elp_packet, 0, BATMAN_ELP_HLEN); + + elp_packet->header.packet_type = BAT_V_ELP; + elp_packet->header.version = COMPAT_VERSION; + elp_packet->header.ttl = 0;
Marek, what are your plans for COMPAT_VERSION? Will there be a COMPAT_VERSION_IV and COMPAT_VERSION_V sometime soon?
Maybe when registering a receive function, you can pass both the packet_type and version. So a received ELP packet with COMPAT_VERSION_IV would automatically get tossed away, and an ELP with COMPAT_VERSION_V would get dispatched.
Andrew