[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120320075846.GF29891@secunet.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:58:46 +0100
From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To: Gao feng <gaofeng@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ipv6: fix incorrent ipv6 ipsec packet fragment
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:22:59AM +0800, Gao feng wrote:
> Since commit 299b0767(ipv6: Fix IPsec slowpath fragmentation problem)
> In func ip6_append_data,after call skb_put(skb, fraglen + dst_exthdrlen)
> the skb->len contains dst_exthdrlen,and we don't reduce dst_exthdrlen at last
> This will make fraggap>0 in next "while cycle",and cause the size of skb incorrent
>
> Fix this by reserve headroom for dst_exthdrlen.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gao feng <gaofeng@...fujitsu.com>
> ---
> net/ipv6/ip6_output.c | 8 +++++---
> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv6/ip6_output.c b/net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
> index d97e071..8d5d204 100644
> --- a/net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
> +++ b/net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
> @@ -1418,6 +1418,8 @@ alloc_new_skb:
> skb->csum = 0;
> /* reserve for fragmentation */
> skb_reserve(skb, hh_len+sizeof(struct frag_hdr));
> + /* reserve for ipsec header */
> + skb_reserve(skb, dst_exthdrlen);
Why not 'reserve for fragmentation and ipsec header' instead
of calling skb_reserve() two times?
The rest of the patch looks good.
--
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