On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 03:20:48PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 10/02/2018 03:05 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 2:54 PM Florian Fainelli
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 10/02/2018 02:17 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 1:07 PM Florian Fainelli
> >>>
On 10/02/2018 03:05 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 2:54 PM Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>
>> On 10/02/2018 02:17 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 1:07 PM Florian Fainelli
>>> wrote:
Hi Eric, Neil,
Should not __dev_kfree_skb_any() call
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 2:54 PM Florian Fainelli wrote:
>
> On 10/02/2018 02:17 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 1:07 PM Florian Fainelli
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Eric, Neil,
> >>
> >> Should not __dev_kfree_skb_any() call kfree_skb() instead of
> >> dev_kfree_skb() which is
On 10/02/2018 02:17 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 1:07 PM Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>
>> Hi Eric, Neil,
>>
>> Should not __dev_kfree_skb_any() call kfree_skb() instead of
>> dev_kfree_skb() which is aliased to consumes_skb() and therefore does
>> not flag the skb with
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 1:07 PM Florian Fainelli wrote:
>
> Hi Eric, Neil,
>
> Should not __dev_kfree_skb_any() call kfree_skb() instead of
> dev_kfree_skb() which is aliased to consumes_skb() and therefore does
> not flag the skb with SKB_REASON_DROPPED?
>
> If we take the in_irq() ||
Hi Eric, Neil,
Should not __dev_kfree_skb_any() call kfree_skb() instead of
dev_kfree_skb() which is aliased to consumes_skb() and therefore does
not flag the skb with SKB_REASON_DROPPED?
If we take the in_irq() || irqs_disabled() branch, we will be calling
__dev_kfree_skb_irq() which takes care
