Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934468Ab3DKIDq (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Apr 2013 04:03:46 -0400 Received: from smtp.eu.citrix.com ([46.33.159.39]:31339 "EHLO SMTP.EU.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753298Ab3DKIDn (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Apr 2013 04:03:43 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,454,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="3447527" Message-ID: <1365667420.27868.125.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH] xen-netback: switch to use skb_partial_csum_set() From: Ian Campbell To: Jason Wang CC: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "davem@davemloft.net" Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 09:03:40 +0100 In-Reply-To: <51666D28.7090500@redhat.com> References: <1365662129-38031-1-git-send-email-jasowang@redhat.com> <1365666364.27868.114.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <51666D28.7090500@redhat.com> Organization: Citrix Systems, Inc. Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3246 Lines: 92 On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 08:58 +0100, Jason Wang wrote: > On 04/11/2013 03:46 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 07:35 +0100, Jason Wang wrote: > >> Switch to use skb_partial_csum_set() to simplify the codes. > > This is incremental on top of your previous patch, right? > > It's an independent patch, since the previous patch has been applied. > >> Cc: Ian Campbell > >> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang > >> --- > >> Note: > >> - Compile test only. > >> --- > >> drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c | 22 ++++++++-------------- > >> 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c b/drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c > >> index 83905a9..70631f0 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c > >> +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c > >> @@ -1156,7 +1156,6 @@ static int netbk_set_skb_gso(struct xenvif *vif, > >> static int checksum_setup(struct xenvif *vif, struct sk_buff *skb) > >> { > >> struct iphdr *iph; > >> - unsigned char *th; > >> int err = -EPROTO; > >> int recalculate_partial_csum = 0; > >> > >> @@ -1180,28 +1179,26 @@ static int checksum_setup(struct xenvif *vif, struct sk_buff *skb) > >> goto out; > >> > >> iph = (void *)skb->data; > >> - th = skb->data + 4 * iph->ihl; > >> - if (th >= skb_tail_pointer(skb)) > >> - goto out; > >> - > >> - skb_set_transport_header(skb, 4 * iph->ihl); > > Is removing this line really correct? > > After commit e5d5deca (net: core: let skb_partial_csum_set() set > transport header), this work was done by skb_partial_csum_set(). Ah, my working tree must be out of date, thanks. > > > >> - skb->csum_start = th - skb->head; > >> switch (iph->protocol) { > >> case IPPROTO_TCP: > >> - skb->csum_offset = offsetof(struct tcphdr, check); > >> + if (!skb_partial_csum_set(skb, 4 * iph->ihl, > >> + offsetof(struct tcphdr, check))) > >> + goto out; > >> > >> if (recalculate_partial_csum) { > >> - struct tcphdr *tcph = (struct tcphdr *)th; > >> + struct tcphdr *tcph = tcp_hdr(skb); > >> tcph->check = ~csum_tcpudp_magic(iph->saddr, iph->daddr, > >> skb->len - iph->ihl*4, > >> IPPROTO_TCP, 0); > >> } > >> break; > >> case IPPROTO_UDP: > >> - skb->csum_offset = offsetof(struct udphdr, check); > >> + if (!skb_partial_csum_set(skb, 4 * iph->ihl, > >> + offsetof(struct udphdr, check))) > >> + goto out; > >> > >> if (recalculate_partial_csum) { > >> - struct udphdr *udph = (struct udphdr *)th; > >> + struct udphdr *udph = udp_hdr(skb); > >> udph->check = ~csum_tcpudp_magic(iph->saddr, iph->daddr, > >> skb->len - iph->ihl*4, > >> IPPROTO_UDP, 0); > >> @@ -1215,9 +1212,6 @@ static int checksum_setup(struct xenvif *vif, struct sk_buff *skb) > >> goto out; > >> } > >> > >> - if ((th + skb->csum_offset + 2) > skb_tail_pointer(skb)) > >> - goto out; > >> - > >> err = 0; > >> > >> out: > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/