Herbert Xu <herb...@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote: > > I'm using the per-skb state for my own purposes and might be looking at it > > elsewhere at the same time. > > AFAICS this cannot happen for secure_packet/verify_packet. In both > cases we have exclusive ownership of the skb.
In code I'm busy working on the patch I'm decrypting may be on the receive queue several times. rxrpc has a jumbo packet concept whereby a packet may be constructed in such a way that it's actually several packets stitched together - the idea being that a router can split it up (not that any actually do that I know of) - but each segment of the jumbo packet may be enqueued as a separate entity. > But it's your code so feel free to send your own patch. I will apply something very similar to my tree. Andy's patch does not apply as-is due to conflicts. David
