[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20150719.113834.2117166333832979820.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2015 11:38:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com
Cc: joe@...ches.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, alexander.duyck@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 RFC net-next] net/vxlan: Fix kernel unaligned access
in __vxlan_find_mac
From: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2015 14:01:34 +0200
> On 07/18/2015 08:06 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
>
>> It seems that this code has had unaligned accesses
>> on this field even before compare_ether_addr was
>> converted to ether_addr_equal.
>>
>> Is sparc64 the only one that emits / ratelimits that
>> unaligned access message? I looked a little, but I
>> didn't find a fixup message when MIPS does unaligned
>> accesses. Are all the other arches silent when
>> fixing up unaligned accesses? Maye adding a generic
>> debug only ratelimited message might help remove
>> more of these. As it's not fatal, naybe the sparc64
>> message should be KERN_DEBUG/pr_debug.
>
> I'm confused, are we suggesting that we "fix" the unaligned
> access by snuffing out the message that complains loudly and correctly
> about it?
>
> See also: large block comment above __pksb_trim
> about correctly using skb_reserve(). Evidently not being
> correctly done for the IPv6-vxlan code path (and possibly
> for other encaps too?)
We should fix the unaligned accesses, rather than quiet the
warning.
--
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