[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9684c26c-9f26-5a7f-3d17-d180afff432c@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 08:35:07 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: linmiaohe <linmiaohe@...wei.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"pshelar@....org" <pshelar@....org>,
"martin.varghese@...ia.com" <martin.varghese@...ia.com>,
"fw@...len.de" <fw@...len.de>,
"dcaratti@...hat.com" <dcaratti@...hat.com>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"steffen.klassert@...unet.com" <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
"pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"shmulik@...anetworks.com" <shmulik@...anetworks.com>,
"kyk.segfault@...il.com" <kyk.segfault@...il.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: eliminate meaningless memcpy to data in
pskb_carve_inside_nonlinear()
On 8/11/20 5:10 AM, linmiaohe wrote:
> Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>> On 8/10/20 5:28 AM, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>>> The skb_shared_info part of the data is assigned in the following
>>> loop. It is meaningless to do a memcpy here.
>>>
>>
>> Reminder : net-next is CLOSED.
>>
>
> Thanks for your remind. I would wait for it open.
>
>> This is not correct. We still have to copy _something_
>>
>> Something like :
>>
>> diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c index 2828f6d5ba898a5e50ccce45589bf1370e474b0f..1c0519426c7ba4b04377fc8054c4223c135879ab 100644
>> --- a/net/core/skbuff.c
>> +++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
>> @@ -5953,8 +5953,8 @@ static int pskb_carve_inside_nonlinear(struct sk_buff *skb, const u32 off,
>> size = SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(ksize(data));
>>
>> memcpy((struct skb_shared_info *)(data + size),
>> - skb_shinfo(skb), offsetof(struct skb_shared_info,
>> - frags[skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frags]));
>> + skb_shinfo(skb), offsetof(struct skb_shared_info,
>> + frags[0]));
>> +
>> if (skb_orphan_frags(skb, gfp_mask)) {
>> kfree(data);
>> return -ENOMEM;
>>
>
> This looks good. Will send a patch v2 soon. May I add a suggested-by tag of you ?
I would advise not using Suggested-by, as this would imply I suggested the idea of changing
this function in the first place.
I will add a Reviewed-by: eventually if your v2 submission looks fine to me.
Thanks.
> Many thanks.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists