From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750704AbVLXT6o (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Dec 2005 14:58:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750709AbVLXT6o (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Dec 2005 14:58:44 -0500 Received: from mail.dvmed.net ([216.237.124.58]:455 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750704AbVLXT6n (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Dec 2005 14:58:43 -0500 Message-ID: <43ADA862.6010906@pobox.com> Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2005 14:58:26 -0500 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds CC: Manfred Spraul , Ayaz Abdulla , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Netdev Subject: Re: [PATCH] forcedeth: fix random memory scribbling bug References: <43AD4ADC.8050004@colorfullife.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "srv2.dvmed.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Linus Torvalds wrote: > However, that > > "skb->end - skb->data" > > calculation is a bit strange. It correctly maps the whole skb, but nod > wouldn't it make more sense to use the length we actually tell the card to > use? > > In other words, wouldn't it be a whole lot more sensible and logical to > use > > np->rx_buf_sz > > instead? That's the value we use for allocation and that's the size we > tell the card we have. [...] Content analysis details: (0.1 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address [69.134.188.146 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Linus Torvalds wrote: > However, that > > "skb->end - skb->data" > > calculation is a bit strange. It correctly maps the whole skb, but nod > wouldn't it make more sense to use the length we actually tell the card to > use? > > In other words, wouldn't it be a whole lot more sensible and logical to > use > > np->rx_buf_sz > > instead? That's the value we use for allocation and that's the size we > tell the card we have. That's the sort of thing I prefer. > Of course, on the alloc path, it seems to add an additional > "NV_RX_ALLOC_PAD" thing, so maybe the "end-data" thing makes sense. None of the other ethernet drivers do 'end - data', which is why I hesitated quite a bit on this change. Jeff