From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hideo AOKI Subject: Re: [RFC] [NET] [0/2] pskb_expand_head() bugfix Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:14:23 -0400 Message-ID: <47ED97EF.9070601@redhat.com> References: <47E946C8.6020006@redhat.com> <20080325235536.GB30298@gondor.apana.org.au> <47EAB667.6010308@redhat.com> <20080327.164935.45964955.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, netdev@vger.kernel.org, haoki@redhat.com To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:52071 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755758AbYC2BOa (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:14:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080327.164935.45964955.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hello, David Miller wrote: > From: Hideo AOKI > Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 16:47:35 -0400 > >> I think that it is inconvenient for caller functions to need >> updateing truesize by themselves. > > Most cases what I can see are in spots where skb->truesize > cannot be modified because the SKB is possibly charged > to a socket. > > In these limited situations where skb->truesize adjustments > really are needed, and legal, it is no harm to open code > things. Thank you for the comments. I understood that updating truesize by caller wasn't problem. And, I may misunderstand the spots where truesize can't be changed. Then, I make patch to update truesize for each network subsystem and ask a review of the patch. Best regards, Hideo -- Hitachi Computer Products (America) Inc.