| To: | Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] ax25 & netrom fixes for 2.6 |
| From: | Jeroen Vreeken <pe1rxq@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 12 Aug 2003 23:09:51 +0200 |
| Cc: | Jeroen Vreeken <pe1rxq@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-hams@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, davem@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20030812135655.7334887b.shemminger@xxxxxxxx>; from shemminger@xxxxxxxx on Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 22:56:55 +0200 |
| References: | <20030812194653.A28977@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20030812135655.7334887b.shemminger@xxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On 2003.08.12 22:56:55 +0200 Stephen Hemminger wrote: > It looks like af_x25 is advertising itself as a new style protocol, yet > if > I walk the receive path: > ax25_kiss_rcv -> ax25_rcv -> ax25_addr_parse > there is no place that checks that the address portion of the buffer > isn't fragmented > into a non_linear skb. Since at the moment the only zero-copy path I can imagine is from packets over a bpq ethernet device wouldn't it be the easiest to just check at ax25_rcv() for non-linear packets and call skb_linearize() for them? That way we would be safe untill we can make sure that the whole of the ax25 stack is non-linear safe? Should I make a new patch with this included? (and possibly the ifconfig problem you mentioned?) Jeroen |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] ax25 & netrom fixes for 2.6, Jeroen Vreeken |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Bonding-devel] Re: [SET 2][PATCH 2/8][bonding] Propagating master's settings toslaves, jamal |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] ax25 & netrom fixes for 2.6, Stephen Hemminger |
| Next by Thread: | [PATCH] ax25 fix for premature free., Stephen Hemminger |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |