On Wed, 2012-08-29 at 22:39 -0400, Alan Ott wrote:
> Since lowpan_process_data() modifies the skb (by calling skb_pull()), we
> need our own copy so that it doesn't affect the data received by other
> protcols (in this case, af_ieee802154).
>
> Signed-off-by: Alan Ott <a...@signal11.us>
> ---
> net/ieee802154/6lowpan.c | 9 ++++++++-
> 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/ieee802154/6lowpan.c b/net/ieee802154/6lowpan.c
> index 6a09522..ce33b02 100644
> --- a/net/ieee802154/6lowpan.c
> +++ b/net/ieee802154/6lowpan.c
> @@ -1133,6 +1133,8 @@ static int lowpan_validate(struct nlattr *tb[], struct
> nlattr *data[])
> static int lowpan_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev,
> struct packet_type *pt, struct net_device *orig_dev)
> {
> + struct sk_buff *local_skb;
> +
> if (!netif_running(dev))
> goto drop;
>
> @@ -1144,7 +1146,12 @@ static int lowpan_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb, struct
> net_device *dev,
> case LOWPAN_DISPATCH_IPHC: /* ipv6 datagram */
> case LOWPAN_DISPATCH_FRAG1: /* first fragment header */
> case LOWPAN_DISPATCH_FRAGN: /* next fragments headers */
> - lowpan_process_data(skb);
> + local_skb = skb_copy(skb, GFP_ATOMIC);
> + if (!local_skb)
> + goto drop;
> + lowpan_process_data(local_skb);
> +
> + kfree_skb(skb);
> break;
> default:
> break;
Its not clear to me why skb_copy() is needed here.
>From patch description, I would say skb_clone() would be enough (and
faster) ?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
