[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <530F3468020000780011FCFB@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 11:49:44 +0000
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To: "Paul Durrant" <Paul.Durrant@...rix.com>
Cc: "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next] consolidate duplicate code is
skb_checksum_setup() helpers
>>> On 27.02.14 at 11:57, Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@...rix.com> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@...e.com]
>> Sent: 27 February 2014 09:05
>> To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
>> Cc: Paul Durrant; davem@...emloft.net; Eric Dumazet
>> Subject: [PATCH net-next] consolidate duplicate code is
>> skb_checksum_setup() helpers
>>
>> Realizing that the skb_maybe_pull_tail() calls in the IP-protocol
>> specific portions of both helpers are terminal ones (i.e. no further
>> pulls are expected), their maximum size to be pulled can be made match
>> their minimal size needed, thus making the code identical and hence
>> possible to be moved into another helper.
>
> There is a difference in the case of an IPv4 TCP packet with options. With
> your patch it will only get pulled up as far as the base header so there may
> need to be another pull for options parsing.
Don't the options start right after the IP header, before the TCP
or UDP one? In which case the pull covers them.
Jan
--
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