From: Sridhar Samudrala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 18:40:18 -0700
> On Fri, 2005-07-08 at 17:22 -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > > From: "David S. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 16:27:56 -0700 (PDT) > > > > > I'll see if I can figure out a way to deal with this cleanly. > > > > I figured out a way. Sridhar can you give this patch below > > a test? > > I did a quick run of the regression tests with the patch and i > didn't see any problems. Thank you very much Sridhar. > > BTW, the rest of the SCTP input path should be audited to make sure > > any other use of the SKB control block on input does not spam the > > ipv4/ipv6 parameter area (struct inet_skb_parm and struct > > inet6_skb_parm). That must be preserved on input (unless you > > unshare the SKB of course). That's why TCP's skb control block > > (in net/tcp.h) uses this header as well. > > We do a skb_clone() before using the SKB control block to store > the ulpevent structure, so i guess it should be OK. Aha! Now if you add the proper header to the front of the ulpevent, you will not need to clone SKBs at all. > > Also, if you can get this patch working, can you check to see > > if it works to change sctp_chunk_free() to go: > > > > BUG_ON(!list_empty(&chunk->list)); > > Even this works fine, so we can replace the list_empty() check > with BUG_ON. Thanks a lot for checking that out for me. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
