[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20130329.145947.1829620308225114250.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:59:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: roy.qing.li@...il.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] core: should call pskb_expand_head if skb
header is cloned in skb_gso_segment in rx path
From: roy.qing.li@...il.com
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 17:34:05 +0800
> From: Li RongQing <roy.qing.li@...il.com>
>
> 12b0004d1d1 (adjust skb_gso_segment() for calling in rx path) tries to kill warnings
> by checking if ip_summed is CHECK_NONE or not in rx path, since if skb_gso_segment()
> is called on rx path, and ->ip_summed has different meaning.
>
> but this maybe break skb if skb header is cloned, and not expand the header, since when
> step into skb_mac_gso_segment(), which will still check ip_summed with CHECKSUM_PARTIAL,
> then do gso_send_check(). and after __skb_gso_segment() in queue_gso_packets() of
> openvswitch, queue_userspace_packet() still checks ip_summed with CHECKSUM_PARTIAL,
> and do checksum.
>
> so I think it is enough to ignore the warning in rx path.
>
> Signed-off-by: Li RongQing <roy.qing.li@...il.com>
I'm not going back-and-forth on this issue yet another time.
I want to see discussion amongst people involved in this area
before applying a patch like this, and I'm therefore not applying
this patch for now (you'll have to submit it again after the
discussions take place).
--
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