[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131203142838.GH14293@zion.uk.xensource.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:28:38 +0000
From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>
To: Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@...rix.com>
CC: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>,
"xen-devel@...ts.xen.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@...rix.com>,
Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v4] xen-netback: fix fragment detection in checksum
setup
On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 02:05:17PM +0000, Paul Durrant wrote:
[...]
> > >
> > > - header_size = skb->network_header + off + MAX_IPOPTLEN;
> > > - maybe_pull_tail(skb, header_size);
> > > + if (!maybe_pull_tail(skb, sizeof(struct iphdr), MAX_IP_HDR_LEN))
> > > + goto out;
> > > +
> >
> > I think you need to correctly update err to reflect this failure.
> > Using -EPROTO will wrongly blame frontend while it is backend that's
> > failing to process the packet.
> >
>
> But a failure should only occur if the packet is malformed, so that would be a frontend error wouldn't it?
>
__pskb_pull_tail may fail due to malloc failure.
However the return value of __pskb_pull_tail cannot reflect the wether
the failure is due to malformed packet or OOM. Not sure what's the best
solution here. What's the malformed packet you were talking about?
Wei.
> Paul
--
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