[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170706.152023.1317350139656231489.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 15:20:23 +0100 (WEST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 11/12] net: Remove all references to SKB_GSO_UDP.
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 13:21:02 -0400
> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Willem de Bruijn
> <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/virtio_net.h b/include/linux/virtio_net.h
>>> index 5209b5e..32fb046 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/virtio_net.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/virtio_net.h
>>> @@ -18,9 +18,6 @@ static inline int virtio_net_hdr_to_skb(struct sk_buff *skb,
>>> case VIRTIO_NET_HDR_GSO_TCPV6:
>>> gso_type = SKB_GSO_TCPV6;
>>> break;
>>> - case VIRTIO_NET_HDR_GSO_UDP:
>>> - gso_type = SKB_GSO_UDP;
>>> - break;
>>
>> Virtio devices negotiate feature support before using this, but
>> tuntap and pf_packet may be passing these packets unconditionally.
>> Perhaps we should fragment those on the spot with skb_segment.
>
> Tun has ioctl TUNSETIFF to probe for features and it can be argued
> that packet sockets should query device features with ethtool before
> relying on them. So perhaps we don't need to fix this up, after all.
Yes, this is the same thought process I went through, and the same
conclusion I arrived at. :-)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists