[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+mtBx-=qAYmBiUhXpYQh3fT+WOK4gH0KLPsMUfycXPgUvcMvw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 15:41:07 -0700
From: Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 4/4] net: Don't clear skbuff hash for IP fragments
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-03-20 at 17:09 -0700, Tom Herbert wrote:
>> There is nothing to gain by clearing hash, it shouldn't be an L4
>> hash anyway.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
>> ---
>> net/ipv4/ip_fragment.c | 1 -
>> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/ipv4/ip_fragment.c b/net/ipv4/ip_fragment.c
>> index c10a3ce..10a64de 100644
>> --- a/net/ipv4/ip_fragment.c
>> +++ b/net/ipv4/ip_fragment.c
>> @@ -704,7 +704,6 @@ struct sk_buff *ip_check_defrag(struct sk_buff *skb, u32 user)
>> memset(IPCB(skb), 0, sizeof(struct inet_skb_parm));
>> if (ip_defrag(skb, user))
>> return NULL;
>> - skb_clear_hash(skb);
>> }
>> }
>> return skb;
>
> It might be worth checking ip_defrag() will set skb->hash to the hash
> provided in the first fragment, the one that might give l4 info...
>
I believe we're already getting this, the head fragment which might
contain the l4_hash is being cloned into the skb for processing packet
in the stack.
>
>
--
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