From: Jiri Benc <jbenc@redhat.com>
To: Eric Garver <e@erig.me>
Cc: Pravin Shelar <pshelar@ovn.org>, Jarno Rajahalme <jarno@ovn.org>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 2/3] openvswitch: Use is_skb_forwardable() for length check.
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 09:49:02 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161209094902.09580191@griffin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161208205040.GJ18719@wsfd-netdev-buildsys.lab.bos.redhat.com>
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 15:50:41 -0500, Eric Garver wrote:
> Should we not also follow the "skbs are untagged" approach that the rest
> of the kernel uses? I'm referring to patches 1 and 2 form Jiri's series
> "openvswitch: make vlan handling consistent".
>
> With those changes is_skb_forwardable() would behave as expected here.
Yes, this would make the check easy and consistent (and was actually my
original motivation for the mentioned patchset).
Still, is_skb_forwardable would be off by 4 bytes. I wonder whether
it's not off even for the bridge case. And dev_forward_skb seems to be
fishy, too.
Jiri
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-09 8:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-29 23:30 [PATCH v3 net-next 1/3] openvswitch: Add a missing break statement Jarno Rajahalme
2016-11-29 23:30 ` [PATCH v3 net-next 2/3] openvswitch: Use is_skb_forwardable() for length check Jarno Rajahalme
2016-11-30 7:23 ` Pravin Shelar
2016-11-30 13:51 ` Jiri Benc
2016-11-30 21:30 ` Jarno Rajahalme
2016-12-01 19:50 ` Pravin Shelar
2016-12-02 9:25 ` Jiri Benc
2016-12-05 0:22 ` Pravin Shelar
2016-12-08 20:50 ` Eric Garver
2016-12-09 8:49 ` Jiri Benc [this message]
2016-11-29 23:30 ` [PATCH v3 net-next 3/3] openvswitch: Fix skb->protocol for vlan frames Jarno Rajahalme
2016-11-30 7:34 ` Pravin Shelar
2016-11-30 14:30 ` Jiri Benc
2016-12-01 20:31 ` Pravin Shelar
2016-12-02 9:42 ` Jiri Benc
2016-12-02 9:49 ` Jiri Benc
2016-12-05 0:58 ` Pravin Shelar
2016-12-14 5:07 ` [PATCH v3 net-next 1/3] openvswitch: Add a missing break statement Pravin Shelar
2016-12-20 1:07 ` Jarno Rajahalme
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=20161209094902.09580191@griffin \
--to=jbenc@redhat.com \
--cc=e@erig.me \
--cc=jarno@ovn.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pshelar@ovn.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).