Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 05:51:02PM +0000, Zach Brown wrote:
>> 2) I changed the final-frag test to be length + fraggap as the math later on
>> seemed to match that.. is that OK?
>
> Yes that's a real bug introduced by a previous rework. Could you
> please split that off into a separate patch?
Sure, here it is by itself. I lightly tested this but didn't actually
use anything that has a non-zero trailer len, I don't think.
Did you have an opinion of the rest of the original patch?
- z
[PATCH] ip_output: account for fraggap when checking to add trailer_len
During other work I noticed that ip_append_data() seemed to be forgetting to
include the frag gap in its calculation of a fragment that consumes the rest of
the payload. Herbert confirmed that this was a bug that snuck in during a
previous rework.
Signed-off-by: Zach Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: 2.6.17-rc1-mm2-fraggap/net/ipv4/ip_output.c
===================================================================
--- 2.6.17-rc1-mm2-fraggap.orig/net/ipv4/ip_output.c
+++ 2.6.17-rc1-mm2-fraggap/net/ipv4/ip_output.c
@@ -904,7 +904,7 @@ alloc_new_skb:
* because we have no idea what fragment will be
* the last.
*/
- if (datalen == length)
+ if (datalen == length + fraggap)
alloclen += rt->u.dst.trailer_len;
if (transhdrlen) {
