| To: | jacoba@xxxxxxxxx (Jacob Avraham) |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: conflicting alignment requirements |
| From: | kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Date: | Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:12:22 +0400 (MSK DST) |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <EJEHILNJPONOHGEOJKICAEDDCAAA.jacoba@cisco.com> from "Jacob Avraham" at Jul 29, 1 08:17:41 pm |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Hello! > copy the packet to a fresh skb (rx_copybreak = 0), the packet will > traverse the net layer with unalinged IP header. Doing this for an arch which traps wrong alignment, you can expect everything (except for crash, which could be bug). Particularly, u32 rules are not going to match such packets. Alexey |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [PATCH] fix for netfilter/nat/pppoe crashes (hopefully), Marc Boucher |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Linux 2.4 networking/routing slowdown, Alexey Kuznetsov |
| Previous by Thread: | RE: conflicting alignment requirements, Jacob Avraham |
| Next by Thread: | Re: conflicting alignment requirements, Ralf Baechle |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |