netdev - Re: [PATCH] e1000e: use ip_hdrlen() instead of bit shift

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAAjsZQxh4ykAHTdPryLyv1kePXGB6jZ-mCXjmiCsBusw5ZGQsQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2024 11:25:52 +0900
From: Moon Yeounsu <yyyynoom@...il.com>
To: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, 
	pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] e1000e: use ip_hdrlen() instead of bit shift

On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 11:06 PM Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de> wrote:
> This helper needs skb_network_header being set up correctly, are you
> sure thats the case here?  ip pointer is fetched via data + 14 right
> above, so it doesn't look like this would work.
I read it once more carefully, and yes, you are right.
Sorry for wasting your time...
It is my first patch to the netdev subsystem.
So... I was too excited. It's all my fault.
Next time, I'll be careful and deliberate.

Thank you for reviewing.