From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753129AbdLLOKV (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Dec 2017 09:10:21 -0500 Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:49978 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752948AbdLLOKR (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Dec 2017 09:10:17 -0500 Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 09:10:11 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <20171212.091011.185992457624793318.davem@davemloft.net> To: willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, joseph.salisbury@canonical.com, edumazet@google.com, dvyukov@google.com, willemb@google.com, daniel@iogearbox.net, jakub.kicinski@netronome.com, linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk, john.fastabend@gmail.com, me@tobin.cc, idosch@mellanox.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, 1715609@bugs.launchpad.net Subject: Re: [REGRESSION][4.13.y][4.14.y][v4.15.y] net: reduce skb_warn_bad_offload() noise From: David Miller In-Reply-To: References: <20171211214457.GA28858@kroah.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 25.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.12 (shards.monkeyblade.net [149.20.54.216]); Tue, 12 Dec 2017 06:10:16 -0800 (PST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Willem de Bruijn Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2017 16:56:56 -0500 > On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 4:44 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman > wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 04:25:26PM -0500, Willem de Bruijn wrote: >>> Note that UFO was removed in 4.14 and that skb_warn_bad_offload >>> can happen for various types of packets, so there may be multiple >>> independent bug reports. I'm investigating two other non-UFO reports >>> just now. >> >> Meta-comment, now that UFO is gone from mainline, I'm wondering if I >> should just delete it from 4.4 and 4.9 as well. Any objections for >> that? I'd like to make it easy to maintain these kernels for a while, >> and having them diverge like this, with all of the issues around UFO, >> seems like it will just make life harder for myself if I leave it in. >> >> Any opinions? > > Some of that removal had to be reverted with commit 0c19f846d582 > ("net: accept UFO datagrams from tuntap and packet") for VM live > migration between kernels. > > Any backports probably should squash that in at the least. Just today > another thread discussed that that patch may not address all open > issues still, so it may be premature to backport at this point. > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/ I would probably discourage backporting the UFO removal, at least for now.