From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] netfilter: xt_TEE: have cloned packet travel through Xtables too Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 18:37:33 +0200 Message-ID: <4BBB634D.6050109@trash.net> References: <1270031934-15940-1-git-send-email-jengelh@medozas.de> <1270031934-15940-6-git-send-email-jengelh@medozas.de> <4BB47768.1050405@trash.net> <4BB47EEA.4020809@trash.net> <4BB49E10.8080608@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Jan Engelhardt Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:61288 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751669Ab0DFQhd (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Apr 2010 12:37:33 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Jan Engelhardt wrote: > On Thursday 2010-04-01 15:22, Patrick McHardy wrote: >>> Or should we be using skb_alloc and copying the data portion over, like >>> ipt_REJECT does since v2.6.24-2931-g9ba99b0? >> I guess pskb_copy() would be most optimal since we can modify >> the header, but the non-linear area could be shared > > Trying to improve my understanding: when doing skb_pull, > does the skb->head that is relevant for pskb_copy move? skb_pull() only changes skb->data.