From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH] IB/ipoib: move back the IB LL address into the hard header,Re: [PATCH] IB/ipoib: move back the IB LL address into the hard header,Re: [PATCH] IB/ipoib: move back the IB LL address into the hard header,Re: [PATCH] IB/ipoib: move back the IB LL address into the hard header Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 11:57:08 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <20161013.115708.2077879944453283228.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20ace6ee-b9e4-073c-56e7-29b2c50ae2d5@redhat.com> <20161013.104314.1842951254979604965.davem@davemloft.net> <2eadc083-e2e0-5c6d-fe84-c5851be3e2ec@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: pabeni@redhat.com, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, sean.hefty@intel.com, hal.rosenstock@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: dledford@redhat.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:34570 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755258AbcJMP7W (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Oct 2016 11:59:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: <2eadc083-e2e0-5c6d-fe84-c5851be3e2ec@redhat.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Doug Ledford Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 11:20:59 -0400 > We *had* a safe way to do that. It got broken. What about increasing > the size of skb->cb? Or adding a skb->dgid that is a > u8[INFINIBAND_ALEN]? Or a more generic skb->dest_ll_addr that is sized > to hold the dest address for any link layer? I understand the situation, and I also believe that making sk_buff any huger than it already is happens to be a non-starter. >> Pushing metadata before the head of the SKB data pointer is illegal, >> as the layers in between might want to push protocol headers, > > That's a total non-issue for us. There are no headers that protocols > can add before ours. Ok, if that's the case, and based upon Paolo's response to me it appears to be, I guess this is OK for now. Paolo please resubmit your patch, thanks.