On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 11:59:41AM +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
>
>
> Jarod Wilson wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 04:55:29PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> >> From: Jarod Wilson
> >> Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 13:07:42 -0400
> >>
> >>> In any case, the number of "mtu < 68" and "#define FOO_MIN_M
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 04:41:40AM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > Actually breaking this up into easily digestable/mergeable chunks is going
> > to be kind of entertaining... Suggestions welcomed on that. First up is
> > obviously the core change, which touches just net/ethernet/eth.c,
> > net/core/
Jarod Wilson wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 04:55:29PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Jarod Wilson
>> Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 13:07:42 -0400
>>
>>> In any case, the number of "mtu < 68" and "#define FOO_MIN_MTU 68", or
>>> variations thereof, under drivers/net/ is kind of crazy.
>>
>> Agree
> Actually breaking this up into easily digestable/mergeable chunks is going
> to be kind of entertaining... Suggestions welcomed on that. First up is
> obviously the core change, which touches just net/ethernet/eth.c,
> net/core/dev.c, include/linux/netdevice.h and
> include/uapi/linux/if_ether.h,
On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 03:24:13AM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > This is definitely going to require a few passes... (Working my way
> > through every driver with an ndo_change_mtu wired up right now to
> > see just how crazy this might get).
>
> It might be something Coccinelle can help you with.
> This is definitely going to require a few passes... (Working my way
> through every driver with an ndo_change_mtu wired up right now to
> see just how crazy this might get).
It might be something Coccinelle can help you with. Try describing the
transformation you want to do, to their mailing lis
On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 01:35:35PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2016 15:53:56 -0400
> Jarod Wilson wrote:
>
> > --- a/net/core/dev.c
> > +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> > @@ -6466,9 +6466,17 @@ int dev_set_mtu(struct net_device *dev, int new_mtu)
> > if (new_mtu == dev->mtu)
> >
On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 10:31:12PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> Hi Jarod
>
> > - /* MTU must be positive.*/
> > - if (new_mtu < 0)
> > + if (new_mtu < dev->min_mtu) {
> > + netdev_err(dev, "Invalid MTU %d requested, hw min %d\n",
> > + new_mtu, dev->min
On Wed, 7 Sep 2016 15:53:56 -0400
Jarod Wilson wrote:
> --- a/net/core/dev.c
> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> @@ -6466,9 +6466,17 @@ int dev_set_mtu(struct net_device *dev, int new_mtu)
> if (new_mtu == dev->mtu)
> return 0;
>
> - /* MTU must be positive.*/
> - if (
Hi Jarod
> - /* MTU must be positive.*/
> - if (new_mtu < 0)
> + if (new_mtu < dev->min_mtu) {
> + netdev_err(dev, "Invalid MTU %d requested, hw min %d\n",
> +new_mtu, dev->min_mtu);
> return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + if (
On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 04:55:29PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jarod Wilson
> Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 13:07:42 -0400
>
> > In any case, the number of "mtu < 68" and "#define FOO_MIN_MTU 68", or
> > variations thereof, under drivers/net/ is kind of crazy.
>
> Agreed, we can have a default an
From: Jarod Wilson
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 13:07:42 -0400
> In any case, the number of "mtu < 68" and "#define FOO_MIN_MTU 68", or
> variations thereof, under drivers/net/ is kind of crazy.
Agreed, we can have a default and let the different cases provide
overrides.
Mostly what to do here is a fu
So... I had a bug reported, about a NIC that ceased to work, if it's MTU
was set to 0, then back to it's original value (1500). This got me
thinking... What does an MTU of 0 even mean? Why should it be allowed?
As it turns out, most (but not all) network drivers have a check in their
ndo_change_mt
13 matches
Mail list logo
