[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOQZsUj71vX-71S4WhJUmerh5VhtheacXVCkGKpyFEHTG9WBgA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2013 18:24:04 -0700
From: Ani Sinha <linuxdev@...rban.org>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: Ani Sinha <ani@...stanetworks.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: RX/dropped counter values for tagged packets
On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 10:44 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>
> I don't know, I am not reading this code like you, I see no problem.
>
> If vlan_do_receive() return true, we "goto another_round" to deliver the
> packt to vlan device.
>
> vlan_do_receive() doesn't deliver the packet at all. It only prepares
> the "another_round"
yes, I am with you on this. But let's focus on this "another_round" code.
>
> So if packet is delivered to vlan, we don't increment rx_dropped.
So in "another_round", if pt_prev is null at the end of the function
(not sure if this can actually happen in reality, but from the code it
looks like a possibility), the dropped counts will get incremented.
Does that make sense?
cheers,
ani
--
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