On 01.03.2016 00:03, Benjamin Poirier wrote:
The current reserved_tailroom calculation fails to take hlen and tlen into account.skb: [__hlen__|__data____________|__tlen___|__extra__] ^ ^ head skb_end_offset In this representation, hlen + data + tlen is the size passed to alloc_skb. "extra" is the extra space made available in __alloc_skb because of rounding up by kmalloc. We can reorder the representation like so: [__hlen__|__data____________|__extra__|__tlen___] ^ ^ head skb_end_offset The maximum space available for ip headers and payload without fragmentation is min(mtu, data + extra). Therefore, reserved_tailroom = data + extra + tlen - min(mtu, data + extra) = skb_end_offset - hlen - min(mtu, skb_end_offset - hlen - tlen) = skb_tailroom - min(mtu, skb_tailroom - tlen) ; after skb_reserve(hlen) Compare the second line to the current expression: reserved_tailroom = skb_end_offset - min(mtu, skb_end_offset) and we can see that hlen and tlen are not taken into account. The min() in the third line can be expanded into: if mtu < skb_tailroom - tlen: reserved_tailroom = skb_tailroom - mtu else: reserved_tailroom = tlen Depending on hlen, tlen, mtu and the number of multicast address records, the current code may output skbs that have less tailroom than dev->needed_tailroom or it may output more skbs than needed because not all space available is used. Fixes: 4c672e4b ("ipv6: mld: fix add_grhead skb_over_panic for devs with large MTUs") Signed-off-by: Benjamin Poirier <bpoir...@suse.com>
I like it, thanks a lot! Acked-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <han...@stressinduktion.org>
