netdev - Re: [net-next 02/11] ixgbe: Mask off check of frag

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <51687DE2.8000705@intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:34:26 -0700
From:	Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, gospo@...hat.com, sassmann@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [net-next 02/11] ixgbe: Mask off check of frag_off as we only
 want fragment offset

On 04/12/2013 02:12 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-04-12 at 14:05 -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>
>>  The problem right now is if I call __skb_get_poff it will go
>> through the portion of that path you didn't call out that does
>> skb_copy_bits.
> Absolutely not : skb->data_len is 0.
>
> How possibly can you say such things ?
>
> OK I give up with this topic.

Yeah, we should agree to disagree since I think at some point we started
arguing two different things.

As for the patch that started this though we are good right?  No problem
with the patch itself, our discussion was over possible future work correct?

Thanks,

Alex
--
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