[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B952C4F.8000504@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 08:56:47 -0800
From: John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"gospo@...hat.com" <gospo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next-2.6 PATCH v2] net: consolidate netif_needs_gso() checks
Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 11:27:50AM -0800, John Fastabend wrote:
>
>> It looks like dev_gso_segment() could be used to "Verify header
>> integrity only" according to the comment? If this is true I think the
>> logic should probably be
>>
>> if (netif_needs_gso(dev, skb)) {
>> if (unlikely(dev_gso_segment(skb)))
>> goto out_kfree_skb;
>> if (skb->next)
>> goto gso;
>> } do your thing
>>
>>
>>
>> That way we linearize the skb if necessary in the case were
>> dev_gso_segment() only verifies the header and does not return a list of
>> segments.
>>
>
> If we needed to linearise the skb then dev_gso_segment should
> perform the segmentation. Is there a case where it doesn't?
>
> Cheers,
Nope as far as I can tell all cases are covered my concerns were
unfounded. Thanks for the review, I'll get this updated and resent.
-John.
--
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