On 08/31/2012 03:01 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> 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) ?
You're probably right. I'll check it out. Thanks.
Alan.
--
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/
