From: Xie He <xie.he.0141@gmail.com>
To: Martin Schiller <ms@dev.tdt.de>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux X25 <linux-x25@vger.kernel.org>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>,
Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>,
netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net v3] drivers/net/wan/lapbether: Use needed_headroom instead of hard_header_len
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 12:20:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJht_ENuzbyYesYtP0703xgRwRBTY9SySe3oXLEtkyL_H_yTSQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d02996f90f64d55d5c5e349560bfde46@dev.tdt.de>
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 5:43 AM Martin Schiller <ms@dev.tdt.de> wrote:
>
> I'm not an expert in the field, but after reading the commit message and
> the previous comments, I'd say that makes sense.
Thanks!
> Shouldn't this kernel panic be intercepted by a skb_cow() before the
> skb_push() in lapbeth_data_transmit()?
When a skb is passing down a protocol stack for transmission, there
might be several different skb_push calls to prepend different
headers. It would be the best (in terms of performance) if we can
allocate the needed header space in advance, so that we don't need to
reallocate the skb every time a new header needs to be prepended.
Adding skb_cow before these skb_push calls would indeed help
preventing kernel panics, but that might not be the essential issue
here, and it might also prevent us from discovering the real issue. (I
guess this is also the reason skb_cow is not included in skb_push
itself.)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-04 19:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-02 19:50 [net v3] drivers/net/wan/lapbether: Use needed_headroom instead of hard_header_len Xie He
2020-08-03 9:49 ` Willem de Bruijn
2020-08-03 17:25 ` Xie He
2020-08-04 12:43 ` Martin Schiller
2020-08-04 19:20 ` Xie He [this message]
2020-08-05 5:23 ` Martin Schiller
2020-08-05 8:57 ` Xie He
2020-08-05 9:33 ` Willem de Bruijn
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=CAJht_ENuzbyYesYtP0703xgRwRBTY9SySe3oXLEtkyL_H_yTSQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=xie.he.0141@gmail.com \
--cc=briannorris@chromium.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-x25@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ms@dev.tdt.de \
--cc=netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com \
/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).