From 1f22fde93466005d803bf2fb1b17147b877fb7ed Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Volker Diels-Grabsch Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2025 21:21:16 +0200 Subject: Improve clarity of comment The new wording clarifies that we (1) use the broadcast MAC address only until we know the actual MAC address of the guest, and (2) our first packets will not necessarily "reach" the guest, in the sense of being processed rather than dropped. (Which is why we actively send an initial ARP and/or NDP message, to get the guest MAC address as soon as possible.) Signed-off-by: Volker Diels-Grabsch Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio --- tap.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/tap.c b/tap.c index 0f8ee25..399eeaa 100644 --- a/tap.c +++ b/tap.c @@ -1512,9 +1512,9 @@ void tap_backend_init(struct ctx *c) case MODE_PASST: tap_sock_unix_init(c); - /* In passt mode, we don't know the guest's MAC address until it - * sends us packets. Use the broadcast address so that our - * first packets will reach it. + /* In passt mode, we don't know the guest's MAC address until + * it sends us packets. Until then, use the broadcast address + * so that our first packets will have a chance to reach it. */ memcpy(&c->guest_mac, MAC_BROADCAST, sizeof(c->guest_mac)); break; -- cgit v1.2.3