[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1192540182.4480.99.camel@localhost>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 09:09:42 -0400
From: jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] [NET_DOC] Document some simple rules for actions
On Tue, 2007-16-10 at 20:51 +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> But I still think the distinction between skb_clone and
> skb_copy_header is wrong.
>
> When you munge a packet, it's still going to go back up
> the stack and be processed along the same path. Therefore
> you should be calling pskb_expand_head.
Dang, just noticed i said skb_expand() in the doc - is that the
issue? I will resend that one patch.
We do call pskb_expand_head() - example look at act_pedit.c
> In other words, this does not explain why skb_copy/pskb_copy
> and skb_copy_expand should differ from skb_clone. As far as
> I can see all these functions should behave in the same manner
> with respect to tc_verd
We need to avoid actions from infinetely looping (eg when they ask for
being reclassified) in a directed graph. That loop ttl count must be
reset to zero if we branch, because that is a new directed path. This is
always true and therefore that field must always be reset.
I have a feeling i am going on a tangent if that doesnt respond to your
comment above.
cheers,
jamal
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists