From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Graf Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] [VLAN]: Update iif when receiving via VLAN device Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 19:34:38 +0200 Message-ID: <20060630173438.GJ14627@postel.suug.ch> References: <20060629233933.GB14627@postel.suug.ch> <1151625826.8922.58.camel@jzny2> <20060630004640.GC14627@postel.suug.ch> <1151629890.8922.121.camel@jzny2> <20060630130811.GE14627@postel.suug.ch> <1151675843.5270.18.camel@jzny2> <20060630141531.GG14627@postel.suug.ch> <1151678118.5270.45.camel@jzny2> <20060630163229.GH14627@postel.suug.ch> <1151687977.5270.91.camel@jzny2> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, David Miller , Patrick McHardy Return-path: Received: from postel.suug.ch ([194.88.212.233]:60345 "EHLO postel.suug.ch") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932828AbWF3ReR (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jun 2006 13:34:17 -0400 To: jamal Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1151687977.5270.91.camel@jzny2> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org * jamal 2006-06-30 13:19 > On Fri, 2006-30-06 at 18:32 +0200, Thomas Graf wrote: > > * jamal 2006-06-30 10:35 > > > > Did you actually try to run this before you reached this conclusion? > > > > I did, fortunately some other bug prevents this from happening, > > packets are simply dropped somewhere. > > > > It is not a bug, Thomas! I am getting a little frustrated now. > The packets will be dropped because we set the at field to zero which is > invalid. That is done on purpose. It is only meaningful for ifb. The > challenge is much bigger than it appears. You could end up deadlocking > on the tx lock. So this was the choice i had to make. Please explain, tc_verd is reset in the tasklet after dequeueing and set again in dev_queue_xmit(). ifb_xmit will always see a valid tc_verd at egress.