On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 05:29:52PM +0100, Nj A ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hello all,
> No bugs are due to the inet_lookup call now using the following:
> if ((s_skb = alloc_skb (MAX_TCP_HEADER + 15, GFP_ATOMIC)) == NULL)
> {
> printk ("%s: Unable to allocate memory \n", __FUNCTION__);
> err = -ENOMEM;
> }
> dev = s_skb->dev;
>
> if (!dev)
> printk ("%s: no device attached to s_skb\n", __FUNCTION__);
> goto process_dev;
>
> sk = inet_lookup (&tcp_hashinfo, src, p_src, dst, p_dst, inet_iif
> (s_skb));
>
> bh_lock_sock (sk);
> process_dev:
> spin_lock (&tmp_lock);
> new_dev = list_entry (&tmp, struct net_device, todo_list);
> spin_unlock (&tmp_lock);
> if (!new_dev)
> printk ("%s: no device attached to new_dev \n", __FUNCTION__);
> s_skb->dev = new_dev;
>
> ...
> bh_unlock_sock (sk);
> ...
>
> However, I am not having the right results. I checked with an established
> socket and expected to see that the socket is established (which is the case)
> but got the wrong state when testing on (sk->sk_state) and the socket seems
> in the TIME_WAIT / CLOSE state.
>
> May be I am corrupting the search by manually attaching a device to the skb?
> Any idea please?
Well, your code will oops just like before - you provide empty skb to
the inet_iif(), which is wrong. Actually you will not even reach that
point, since your code will exit after skb->dev check.
Try simple inet_lookup(&tcp_hashinfo, src, p_src, dst, p_dst, 0).
It does work.
--
Evgeniy Polyakov
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
