netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Do you know about skb_header_pointer() ?

To: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Do you know about skb_header_pointer() ?
From: Harald Welte <laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:00:40 +0200
Cc: yasuyuki.kozakai@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, kaber@xxxxxxxxx, kadlec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kisza@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, usagi-core@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20040819071750.67f0e924.davem@redhat.com>
Mail-followup-to: Harald Welte <laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, yasuyuki.kozakai@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, kaber@xxxxxxxxx, kadlec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kisza@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, usagi-core@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <200408190721.QAA02944@toshiba.co.jp> <20040819094401.GY3921@sunbeam.de.gnumonks.org> <20040819071750.67f0e924.davem@redhat.com>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i
On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 07:17:50AM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:44:01 +0200
> Harald Welte <laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > http://lists.netfilter.org/pipermail/netfilter-devel/2004-August/016277.html
> 
> I totally disagree with this change.

Ok, that's fine with me.   Let's stay with the skb_header_pointer(),
which by the way [as expected] is not visible on my profile runs.

Still, I am curious to know if anyone on one of the Cc'ed mailinglists
can imagine a case where parts of the header up and including the tcp
options could be non-linear.

And no, I do not want to know this in order to say that
skb_heder_pointer() is bad.  I just want to know, because then we might
still need some magic for those cases in order to avoid a case where we
end up with per-rule copies or similar stuff again.

Thanks!

-- 
- Harald Welte <laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>             http://www.netfilter.org/
============================================================================
  "Fragmentation is like classful addressing -- an interesting early
   architectural error that shows how much experimentation was going
   on while IP was being designed."                    -- Paul Vixie

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>