[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170609.153937.1403217696199851743.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2017 15:39:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: chenbofeng.kernel@...il.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, lorenzo@...gle.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
fengc@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv6: Initial skb->dev and skb->protocol in
ip6_output
From: Chenbo Feng <chenbofeng.kernel@...il.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 12:13:57 -0700
>
>
> On 06/09/2017 12:08 PM, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Chenbo Feng <chenbofeng.kernel@...il.com>
>> Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 12:06:07 -0700
>>
>>> From: Chenbo Feng <fengc@...gle.com>
>>>
>>> Move the initialization of skb->dev and skb->protocol from
>>> ip6_finish_output2 to ip6_output. This can make the skb->dev and
>>> skb->protocol information avalaible to the CGROUP eBPF filter.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chenbo Feng <fengc@...gle.com>
>>> Acked-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
>> Applied, thanks.
>>
>> This makes ipv6 consistent with ipv4.
>>
>> I am surprised this wasn't noticed, for example, in netfilter.
>> .
>>
> Hi David,
>
> This patch is still under working since it may have problem with
> ip_fragment() call, did you applied it already? Should I send a revert
> patch to you then?
A revert is necessary or a relative fixup.
Thank you.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists