From: Eran Liberty <liberty@extricom.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: galak@kernel.crashing.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gainfar.c : skb_over_panic
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 12:13:29 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C1F2D39.9050804@extricom.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100617.122030.112600189.davem@davemloft.net>
David Miller wrote:
> From: Eran Liberty <liberty@extricom.com>
> Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:32:54 +0300
>
>
>> I have demonstrated skb_over_panic with linux 2.6.32.15 on a mpc8548
>> based product.
>>
>
> A fix for a similar bug was necessary for the ucc_geth driver,
> see below.
>
> The real problem is that skb->data assignment, the rest of the
> SKB state has to be reset, and not doing that is what results in
> the skb_over_panic calls.
>
> >From db176edc89abbf22e6db6853f8581f9475fe8ec1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Sergey Matyukevich <geomatsi@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 06:35:20 +0000
> Subject: [PATCH] ucc_geth: fix for RX skb buffers recycling
>
> This patch implements a proper modification of RX skb buffers before
> recycling. Adjusting only skb->data is not enough because after that
> skb->tail and skb->len become incorrect.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sergey Matyukevich <geomatsi@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
> ---
> drivers/net/ucc_geth.c | 2 ++
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ucc_geth.c b/drivers/net/ucc_geth.c
> index 4a34833..807470e 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ucc_geth.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ucc_geth.c
> @@ -3215,6 +3215,8 @@ static int ucc_geth_rx(struct ucc_geth_private *ugeth, u8 rxQ, int rx_work_limit
> __func__, __LINE__, (u32) skb);
> if (skb) {
> skb->data = skb->head + NET_SKB_PAD;
> + skb->len = 0;
> + skb_reset_tail_pointer(skb);
> __skb_queue_head(&ugeth->rx_recycle, skb);
> }
>
David,
I have compared the suggested patch with what the function skb_recycle_check() does. Both patch and skb_recycle_check()
have skb_reset_tail_pointer(). While the patch zero only skb->len, skb_recycle_check()
clears the whole skb (up to tail). On top of that skb_recycle_check() preforms a whole set of other checks and cleanups.
The question is, which action is MORE correct: the pin-point action of the patch suggested or the broader checks of skb_recycle_check() function?
-- Liberty
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-21 9:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-17 16:32 [PATCH] gainfar.c : skb_over_panic Eran Liberty
2010-06-17 19:20 ` David Miller
2010-06-21 9:13 ` Eran Liberty [this message]
2010-06-21 20:47 ` David Miller
2010-06-23 17:52 ` Eran Liberty
2010-06-23 18:27 ` David Miller
2010-06-23 15:03 ` Eran Liberty
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4C1F2D39.9050804@extricom.com \
--to=liberty@extricom.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=galak@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.