[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <21ccf1acce6f4a711f6323f9392c1254135999b8.camel@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2023 15:42:04 +0100
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, "David S . Miller"
<davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
eric.dumazet@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: check dev->gso_max_size in gso_features_check()
On Tue, 2023-12-19 at 12:53 +0000, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
> index 0432b04cf9b000628497345d9ec0e8a141a617a3..b55d539dca153f921260346a4f23bcce0e888227 100644
> --- a/net/core/dev.c
> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> @@ -3471,6 +3471,9 @@ static netdev_features_t gso_features_check(const struct sk_buff *skb,
> if (gso_segs > READ_ONCE(dev->gso_max_segs))
> return features & ~NETIF_F_GSO_MASK;
>
> + if (unlikely(skb->len >= READ_ONCE(dev->gso_max_size)))
Since we are checking vs the limit supported by the NIC, should the
above be 'tso_max_size'?
My understanding is that 'gso{,_ipv4}_max_size' is the max aggregate
size the device asks for, and 'tso_max_size' is the actual limit
supported by the NIC.
Thanks!
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists