On 03/04/2019 02:37 PM, Peter Oskolkov wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 1:03 PM David Ahern wrote:
>>
>> On 3/4/19 1:39 PM, Peter Oskolkov wrote:
>>> I found the problem: skb->inner_protocol was not set, so software GSO
>>> fallback failed. I have a patch that fixes the issue: IPIP+GRE+TCP
>>>
On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 1:03 PM David Ahern wrote:
>
> On 3/4/19 1:39 PM, Peter Oskolkov wrote:
> > I found the problem: skb->inner_protocol was not set, so software GSO
> > fallback failed. I have a patch that fixes the issue: IPIP+GRE+TCP
> > gso works! net-next is closed though... Will have to
On 3/4/19 1:39 PM, Peter Oskolkov wrote:
> I found the problem: skb->inner_protocol was not set, so software GSO
> fallback failed. I have a patch that fixes the issue: IPIP+GRE+TCP
> gso works! net-next is closed though... Will have to wait for net-next
> to reopen.
That's a bug fix. I suggest s
On Sun, Mar 3, 2019 at 6:55 PM Willem de Bruijn
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 9:27 PM David Ahern wrote:
> >
> > On 2/28/19 10:57 AM, Peter Oskolkov wrote:
> > > David: I'm not sure how to test GSO (I assume we are talking about GSO
> > > here) in
> > > the selftest: the encapping code sets S
On Sun, Mar 3, 2019 at 9:55 PM Willem de Bruijn
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 9:27 PM David Ahern wrote:
> >
> > On 2/28/19 10:57 AM, Peter Oskolkov wrote:
> > > David: I'm not sure how to test GSO (I assume we are talking about GSO
> > > here) in
> > > the selftest: the encapping code sets S
On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 9:27 PM David Ahern wrote:
>
> On 2/28/19 10:57 AM, Peter Oskolkov wrote:
> > David: I'm not sure how to test GSO (I assume we are talking about GSO
> > here) in
> > the selftest: the encapping code sets SKB_GSO_DODGY flag, and veth does
> > not support
> > dodginess: "tx-gs
On 2/28/19 10:57 AM, Peter Oskolkov wrote:
> David: I'm not sure how to test GSO (I assume we are talking about GSO
> here) in
> the selftest: the encapping code sets SKB_GSO_DODGY flag, and veth does
> not support
> dodginess: "tx-gso-robust: off [fixed]".
>
> If the "dodgy" flag is not set, then
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 11:10 AM David Ahern wrote:
>
> On 2/14/19 11:42 AM, Peter Oskolkov wrote:
> > I'll refactor the test as you suggest here
> > when I add VRF and GRO tests in a couple of weeks, if this is OK.
>
> IMO, the tests should go in with the feature, not a release later. If we
> are
On 2/14/19 11:42 AM, Peter Oskolkov wrote:
> I'll refactor the test as you suggest here
> when I add VRF and GRO tests in a couple of weeks, if this is OK.
IMO, the tests should go in with the feature, not a release later. If we
are at -rc6 this week then you might get next week as well.
The unre
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 10:11 AM David Ahern wrote:
>
> On 2/13/19 11:09 PM, Peter Oskolkov wrote:
> > On error the skb should be freed. Tested with diff/steps
> > provided by David Ahern.
> >
> > Reported-by: David Ahern
> > Fixes: 3bd0b15281af ("bpf: add handling of BPF_LWT_REROUTE to lwt_bpf.c
On 2/13/19 11:09 PM, Peter Oskolkov wrote:
> On error the skb should be freed. Tested with diff/steps
> provided by David Ahern.
>
> Reported-by: David Ahern
> Fixes: 3bd0b15281af ("bpf: add handling of BPF_LWT_REROUTE to lwt_bpf.c")
> Signed-off-by: Peter Oskolkov
> ---
> net/core/lwt_bpf.c |
On error the skb should be freed. Tested with diff/steps
provided by David Ahern.
Reported-by: David Ahern
Fixes: 3bd0b15281af ("bpf: add handling of BPF_LWT_REROUTE to lwt_bpf.c")
Signed-off-by: Peter Oskolkov
---
net/core/lwt_bpf.c | 24
1 file changed, 16 insertions(
12 matches
Mail list logo
