[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1263942945.17501.1.camel@localhost>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 15:15:45 -0800
From: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: "Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
"sri@...ibm.com" <sri@...ibm.com>,
"herbert@...dor.apana.org.au" <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6] IFix IPv6 GSO type checks in Intel
ethernet drivers
On Tue, 2010-01-19 at 15:14 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: "Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 13:11:00 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
>
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 19 Jan 2010, Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
> >
> >> Found this problem when testing IPv6 from a KVM guest to a remote
> >> host via e1000e device on the host.
> >> The following patch fixes the check for IPv6 GSO packet in Intel
> >> ethernet drivers to use skb_is_gso_v6(). SKB_GSO_DODGY is also set
> >> when packets are forwarded from a guest.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Sridhar Samudrala <sri@...ibm.com
> >
> > Looks fine, thanks! The current code in net-next and 2.6.32 both have
> > exactly the same condition in skb_is_gso_v6, so I'm not sure that this
> > patch alone will fix any issues, FYI. If this patch is part of another
> > set or dependent upon another for the actual change in behavior mentioned
> > in the comment, I think it should be noted or sent in a series.
> >
> > Ack-ed by: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
>
> Just FYI, I'm assuming I'll get this via Jeff eventually.
Correct, I will add this patch to my queue of patches.
Cheers,
Jeff
--
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