Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 21 Feb 2003 01:14:04 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 21 Feb 2003 01:14:04 -0500 Received: from [63.205.85.133] ([63.205.85.133]:43271 "EHLO schmee.sfgoth.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 21 Feb 2003 01:14:03 -0500 Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 22:24:04 -0800 From: Mitchell Blank Jr To: "David S. Miller" Cc: chas@locutus.cmf.nrl.navy.mil, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ATM] who 'owns' the skb created by drivers/atm? Message-ID: <20030220222404.B11525@sfgoth.com> References: <1045808570.22228.2.camel@rth.ninka.net> <20030220221255.A11525@sfgoth.com> <20030220.220035.64239800.davem@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <20030220.220035.64239800.davem@redhat.com>; from davem@redhat.com on Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 10:00:35PM -0800 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 872 Lines: 21 David S. Miller wrote: > Some people seem to be suggesting that we need to zero > out ->cb before passing the SKB to netif_rx() but I don't see why > that would be neccesary. > > It is true, the whole input mechanism depends upon skb->cb[] being > clear on new skbs coming in via netif_rx(). Hmmmm.. I guess we've just been getting lucky before in that case - we've always just left the ATM_SKB() stuff in there. Chas - I guess you should just do a memset(skb->cb, 0, sizeof(skb->cb)) just before the netif_rx() in {clip,lec,mpc}.c and before the ppp_input() in pppoatm.c to make sure it's zeroed correctly. -Mitch - 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/