On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 9:20 PM, wei zhang <asuka....@163.com> wrote:
> At 2014-04-05 07:05:59,"Jesse Gross" <je...@nicira.com> wrote:
>>On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Wei Zhang <asuka....@163.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> v2 -> v1: use the same logic of the gre_rcv() to distinguish which packet is
>>> intended to us!
>>
>>As a tip on kernel process: if you put the version information after
>>three dashes below the signed-off-by line then git will automatically
>>remove it when the final patch is applied.
>
> Thanks, should I modify it and send a v3 patch?
>
>>
>>> diff --git a/net/openvswitch/vport-gre.c b/net/openvswitch/vport-gre.c
>>> index a3d6951..f391df1 100644
>>> --- a/net/openvswitch/vport-gre.c
>>> +++ b/net/openvswitch/vport-gre.c
>>> @@ -110,6 +110,21 @@ static int gre_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb,
>>> return PACKET_RCVD;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +/* Called with rcu_read_lock and BH disabled. */
>>> +static int gre_err(struct sk_buff *skb, u32 info,
>>> + const struct tnl_ptk_info *tpi)
>>> +{
>>> + struct ovs_net *ovs_net;
>>> + struct vport *vport;
>>> +
>>> + ovs_net = net_generic(dev_net(skb->dev), ovs_net_id);
>>> + vport = rcu_dereference(ovs_net->vport_net.gre_vport);
>>> + if (unlikely(!vport))
>>> + return PACKET_REJECT;
>>> + else
>>> + return PACKET_RCVD;
>>
>>Sorry, I forgot to say this before - if we receive the packet then we
>>should also call consume_skb() on it.
>
> Maybe there is no need to call consume_skb()? The icmp_rcv() would
> call kfree_skb() for us. I also checked the ipgre_err(), it return
> PACKET_RCVD without call consume_skb() too.
Thanks, you are right. I applied your patch as is.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
