On Thursday 03 January 2008 6:23:22 am jamal wrote: > On Thu, 2008-03-01 at 10:58 +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > > On 02-01-2008 17:01, Paul Moore wrote: > > > This patch is needed by some of the labeled networking changes > > > proposed for 2.6.25, does anyone have any objections? > > > > Probably Jamal could be the most interested (added to CC): > > Gracias Jarek. > Paul, (out of curiosity more than anything) what are the > circumstances of the cloned skb - are you going to reinject it back > at some point? > > I cant think of any good reason why iif shouldnt be copied - thats > how its been from the begining (dammit;->). The reason it hasnt > mattered so far is everything that needs to write the iif never > copied (refer to Documentation/networking/tc-actions-env-rules.txt). > For correctness i think it should be copied. So no objections; > The better patch would be to just put it in skb_clone and remove it > from tc_act_clone.
While I'm at it, is there some reason for this #define in __skb_clone()? #define C(x) n->x = skb->x ... it seems kinda silly to me and I tend to think the code would be better without it. -- paul moore linux security @ hp -- 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
