[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f0639ba8-ba57-4782-1133-443b51d61bb0@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 20:08:44 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch net] net: make pskb_trim_rcsum_slow() robust
On 10/29/2018 07:41 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 7:25 PM Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/29/2018 07:21 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 7:14 PM Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Would not it be simpler to set ip_summed to CHECKSUM_NONE (no need to save old_csum) ?
>>>
>>> For !CHECKSUM_COMPLETE, ip_summed should be untouched, right?
>>>
>>> If you mean only setting to CHECKSUM_NONE for CHECKSUM_COMPLETE case,
>>> the end result may not be simpler.
>>
>> I meant to reinstate what was there before my patch in this error case
>>
>> if (skb->ip_summed == CHECKSUM_COMPLETE)
>> skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_NONE;
>>
>> That would only be run in error (quite unlikely) path, instead of saving old_csum in all cases.
>
> I know your point, however, I am not sure that is a desired behavior.
>
> On failure, I think the whole skb should be restored to its previous state
> before entering this function, changing it to CHECKSUM_NONE on failure
> is inconsistent with success case.
>
Before my patch, we were changing skb->ip_summed to CHECKSUM_NONE,
so why suddenly we need to be consistent ?
In any case, ip_check_defrag() should really drop this skb, as for other allocation
failures (like skb_share_check()), if really we want consistency.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists