[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1292509857.2883.190.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 15:30:57 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Junchang Wang <junchangwang@...il.com>
Cc: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
Xinan Tang <xinan.tang@...el.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: increase skb->users instead of skb_clone()
Le jeudi 16 décembre 2010 à 22:20 +0800, Junchang Wang a écrit :
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com> wrote:
>
> >> You beat me, but I was thinking of a different way, adding a new
> >> pt_prev->xmit_func(), handling all the details (no need for atomic ops
> >> on skb users if packet is not delivered at all).
> >>
> >> By the way, your patch is not 100% safe/OK, because af_packet rcv()
> >> handler writes on skb (skb_pull() and all)
> >>
> >
> > But af_packet_rcv() restores skbs at last.
> >
> > if (skb_head != skb->data && skb_shared(skb)) {
> > skb->data = skb_head;
> > skb->len = skb_len;
> > }
> >
> If af packet_rcv invokes skb_clone, this skb is differ from the original one.
> Eric's warning is right.
It was a false alarm.
If packet_rcv() invokes skb_clone(), skb still points to original skb.
No worry.
--
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