[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+FuTSfmKFVZ7_q6nU92YYk-MLKWTa_bkE+L4C8vi5+UQ1_a8A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2020 10:56:16 -0500
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: wangyunjian <wangyunjian@...wei.com>
Cc: Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
"Lilijun (Jerry)" <jerry.lilijun@...wei.com>,
chenchanghu <chenchanghu@...wei.com>,
xudingke <xudingke@...wei.com>,
"huangbin (J)" <brian.huangbin@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] tun: fix return value when the number of iovs exceeds MAX_SKB_FRAGS
On Thu, Dec 24, 2020 at 6:51 AM wangyunjian <wangyunjian@...wei.com> wrote:
>
> From: Yunjian Wang <wangyunjian@...wei.com>
>
> Currently the tun_napi_alloc_frags() function returns -ENOMEM when the
> number of iovs exceeds MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 1. However this is inappropriate,
> we should use -EMSGSIZE instead of -ENOMEM.
>
> Fixes: 90e33d459407 ("tun: enable napi_gro_frags() for TUN/TAP driver")
> Signed-off-by: Yunjian Wang <wangyunjian@...wei.com>
Acked-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
It might be good to explain why the distinction matters: one denotes a
transient failure that the caller (specifically vhost_net) can retry,
the other a persistent failure due to bad packet geometry that should
be dropped.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists