[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211116065931.054266c0@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 06:59:31 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
lorenzo.bianconi@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net, ast@...nel.org,
daniel@...earbox.net, shayagr@...zon.com, john.fastabend@...il.com,
dsahern@...nel.org, brouer@...hat.com, echaudro@...hat.com,
jasowang@...hat.com, alexander.duyck@...il.com, saeed@...nel.org,
maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com, magnus.karlsson@...el.com,
tirthendu.sarkar@...el.com, toke@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 bpf-next 12/23] bpf: add multi-buff support to the
bpf_xdp_adjust_tail() API
On Mon, 15 Nov 2021 23:33:06 +0100 Lorenzo Bianconi wrote:
> + if (!rxq->frag_size || rxq->frag_size > xdp->frame_sz)
Why the latter check?
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
> + tailroom = rxq->frag_size - skb_frag_size(frag) - skb_frag_off(frag);
Looks good. We can adjust/extend the exact semantics as drivers add
support. Important part is we should be safe from negligence.
Acked-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists