| To: | "James R. Leu" <jleu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Move shaper control information into skb->cb |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 25 Apr 2000 22:23:01 +0200 |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20000425160624.B571@doit.wisc.edu>; from James R. Leu on Tue, Apr 25, 2000 at 10:05:59PM +0200 |
| References: | <20000424234623.A1446@fred.muc.de> <200004242306.QAA02602@pizda.ninka.net> <20000425015008.A1689@fred.muc.de> <200004242347.QAA02669@pizda.ninka.net> <20000425020135.A1762@fred.muc.de> <20000425160624.B571@doit.wisc.edu> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, Apr 25, 2000 at 10:05:59PM +0200, James R. Leu wrote:
> With all this talk of the CB field. What is the correct way to use the CB
> field when implementing a new protocol?
Like the new comment says:
/*
* This is the control buffer. It is free to use for every
* layer. Please put your private variables there. If you
* want to keep them across layers you have to do a skb_clone()
* first. This is owned by whoever has the skb queued ATM.
*/
As long as you have it queued skb->cb is yours. If you want to queue
packets over dev_queue_xmit you have to do a skb_clone() anyways
[playing games with skb->users is not recommended anymore], which
does a new scratch copy of skb->cb
-Andi
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] Move shaper control information into skb->cb, James R. Leu |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Non-fragmented ICMPv6 packets with an IPv6 fragment header, Richard Jørgensen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] Move shaper control information into skb->cb, James R. Leu |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] Move shaper control information into skb->cb, Werner Almesberger |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |