> On 26 Feb 2021, at 14:08, Alexander Bluhm <alexander.bl...@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I always bothered me that ip_fragment() and ip6_fragment() behave
> sligtly differently. Unify them and use an mlist to simplify the
> fragment list.
>
> - The functions ip_fragment() and ip6_fragment() always consume the mbuf.
> - They free the mbuf and mbuf list in case of an error.
> - They care about the counter.
> - Adjust the code a bit to make v4 and v6 look similar.
> - Maybe there was an mbuf leak when pf_route6() called pf_refragment6()
> and it failed. Now the mbuf is always freed by ip6_fragment().
>
> ok?
ok mvs@
