[Top] [All Lists]

[23/*] [IPV4] Kill remaining unnecessary uses of dst_pmtu

To: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [23/*] [IPV4] Kill remaining unnecessary uses of dst_pmtu
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:19:18 +1100
Cc: Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040907i
Hi Dave:

Once again here is a couple of trivial dst_pmtu/dst_mtu replacements.
In both locations, we can only have simple dst entries which means
that dst == dst->path.

BTW, this is the rule that we should apply in future for uses of
dst_mtu/dst_pmtu (or other metrics on dst).  If the only dst's that
can appear are simple dst's (dst == dst->path), then we should use
dst_mtu or dst_metric.  If dst != dst->path, then whoever is writing
the code will need to think about which of dst or dst->path is the
right one.

In most instances dst will be the one.  However, as we have seen in
ip_append_data, dst->path may be needed rarely.  In particular, if
we're doing fragmentation immediately after IPsec, then you may need

Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Visit Openswan at
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Home Page:
PGP Key:

Attachment: xfrm-23
Description: Text document

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