On 10/9/15 9:38 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Fri, 2015-10-09 at 20:19 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
since this bug wasn't fixed at once in all places, it means
that it is hard to review _all_ needed call-sites.
There are 7 places that call skb_sender_cpu_clear() in net-next.
Plus 2 more in net.
How many such paths from rx to tx left?
On the first glance ovs is missing one and who knows what else.
Alexei, what's happening ?
The original patch is 6 months old. If this issue was so urgent, how
comes it took so long to catch the remaining bugs ?
no urgency at all. bpf side is clean, so I'm not worried :)
Just add skb_sender_cpu_clear() where needed, thanks.
Using union is hard, but there is a price to performance.
skb size is absolutely critical and deserves some headaches.
yep. as I said it shouldn't be increased and proposed in-band sign bit.
Anyway, since you and Daniel are ok with adding skb_sender_cpu_clear()
in other places, I rest my case.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
