| Message ID | 1394468807-25980-5-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
As a netdev reader, I don't see patches 1-3, did you post them somewhere else and not CC: netdev? If so, please don't do that without at least making a mention of what's going on in the 0/N posting. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:40:54 -0400 (EDT) > > As a netdev reader, I don't see patches 1-3, did you post them somewhere else > and not CC: netdev? > > If so, please don't do that without at least making a mention of what's going > on in the 0/N posting. Nevermind, I see them as older postings in my queue. Are you using the commit date as the date for your outgoing emails? Don't do that, it causes a patch series get chopped up and intertwined with other ones in patchwork and therefore makes more work for me. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 01:43:59PM -0400, David Miller wrote: > From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> > Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:40:54 -0400 (EDT) > > > > > As a netdev reader, I don't see patches 1-3, did you post them somewhere else > > and not CC: netdev? > > > > If so, please don't do that without at least making a mention of what's going > > on in the 0/N posting. > > Nevermind, I see them as older postings in my queue. > > Are you using the commit date as the date for your outgoing emails? I don't really know, I just used git send-email to prepare them. I saw a large delay after I sent them all until patches 4/5 appeared on list. Could just be some hiccup in the smtp server (using ssmtp). > Don't do that, it causes a patch series get chopped up and intertwined > with other ones in patchwork and therefore makes more work for me. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:56:06 +0200 > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 01:43:59PM -0400, David Miller wrote: >> From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> >> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 13:40:54 -0400 (EDT) >> >> > >> > As a netdev reader, I don't see patches 1-3, did you post them somewhere else >> > and not CC: netdev? >> > >> > If so, please don't do that without at least making a mention of what's going >> > on in the 0/N posting. >> >> Nevermind, I see them as older postings in my queue. >> >> Are you using the commit date as the date for your outgoing emails? > > I don't really know, I just used git send-email to prepare them. > > I saw a large delay after I sent them all until patches 4/5 > appeared on list. Could just be some hiccup in the smtp server > (using ssmtp). Yeah that sounds like a better explanation then. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c index af386e1..64ee4e6 100644 --- a/net/core/skbuff.c +++ b/net/core/skbuff.c @@ -2853,7 +2853,7 @@ struct sk_buff *skb_segment(struct sk_buff *head_skb, { struct sk_buff *segs = NULL; struct sk_buff *tail = NULL; - struct sk_buff *fskb = skb_shinfo(head_skb)->frag_list; + struct sk_buff *list_skb = skb_shinfo(head_skb)->frag_list; skb_frag_t *frag = skb_shinfo(head_skb)->frags; unsigned int mss = skb_shinfo(head_skb)->gso_size; unsigned int doffset = head_skb->data - skb_mac_header(head_skb); @@ -2894,14 +2894,14 @@ struct sk_buff *skb_segment(struct sk_buff *head_skb, if (hsize > len || !sg) hsize = len; - if (!hsize && i >= nfrags && skb_headlen(fskb) && - (skb_headlen(fskb) == len || sg)) { - BUG_ON(skb_headlen(fskb) > len); + if (!hsize && i >= nfrags && skb_headlen(list_skb) && + (skb_headlen(list_skb) == len || sg)) { + BUG_ON(skb_headlen(list_skb) > len); i = 0; - nfrags = skb_shinfo(fskb)->nr_frags; - frag = skb_shinfo(fskb)->frags; - pos += skb_headlen(fskb); + nfrags = skb_shinfo(list_skb)->nr_frags; + frag = skb_shinfo(list_skb)->frags; + pos += skb_headlen(list_skb); while (pos < offset + len) { BUG_ON(i >= nfrags); @@ -2915,8 +2915,8 @@ struct sk_buff *skb_segment(struct sk_buff *head_skb, frag++; } - nskb = skb_clone(fskb, GFP_ATOMIC); - fskb = fskb->next; + nskb = skb_clone(list_skb, GFP_ATOMIC); + list_skb = list_skb->next; if (unlikely(!nskb)) goto err; @@ -2983,15 +2983,15 @@ struct sk_buff *skb_segment(struct sk_buff *head_skb, while (pos < offset + len) { if (i >= nfrags) { - BUG_ON(skb_headlen(fskb)); + BUG_ON(skb_headlen(list_skb)); i = 0; - nfrags = skb_shinfo(fskb)->nr_frags; - frag = skb_shinfo(fskb)->frags; + nfrags = skb_shinfo(list_skb)->nr_frags; + frag = skb_shinfo(list_skb)->frags; BUG_ON(!nfrags); - fskb = fskb->next; + list_skb = list_skb->next; } if (unlikely(skb_shinfo(nskb)->nr_frags >=
fskb is unrelated to frag: it's coming from frag_list. Rename it list_skb to avoid confusion. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> --- net/core/skbuff.c | 26 +++++++++++++------------- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)