[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y3XyGIVnX2xvZ/bU@Laptop-X1>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2022 16:34:32 +0800
From: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
To: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Jonathan Toppins <jtoppins@...hat.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, Liang Li <liali@...hat.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 net] bonding: fix ICMPv6 header handling when receiving
IPv6 messages
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 08:29:58PM -0800, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
> > #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IPV6)
> >- } else if (is_ipv6) {
> >+ } else if (is_ipv6 && skb_header_pointer(skb, 0, sizeof(ip6_hdr), &ip6_hdr)) {
> > return bond_na_rcv(skb, bond, slave);
> > #endif
> > } else {
> >
> >What do you think?
>
> I don't see how this solves the icmp6_hdr() / ipv6_hdr() problem
> in bond_na_rcv(); skb_header_pointer() doesn't do a pull, it just copies
> into the supplied struct (if necessary).
Hmm... Maybe I didn't get what you and Eric means. If we can copy the
supplied buffer success, doesn't this make sure IPv6 header is in skb?
Thanks
Hangbin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists