search for: sk_skb_cb

...may be running packet capture. > > > > Ran these changes through the selftest and it seems to work. > > Can we possibly put the new field at the end of the CB and then have TC > look at it in the CB? We already do a bit of such CB juggling in strp > (first member of struct sk_skb_cb). Using the CB between different layers is very fragile and I would like to avoid it. Note that the skb can pass various layers until hitting the classifier, each of which can decide to memset() the CB. Anyway, I think I have a better alternative. I added the 'l2_miss' bit to the tc skb e...

...when someone > * may be running packet capture. > > Ran these changes through the selftest and it seems to work. Can we possibly put the new field at the end of the CB and then have TC look at it in the CB? We already do a bit of such CB juggling in strp (first member of struct sk_skb_cb).

...> > > > > > Ran these changes through the selftest and it seems to work. > > > > Can we possibly put the new field at the end of the CB and then have TC > > look at it in the CB? We already do a bit of such CB juggling in strp > > (first member of struct sk_skb_cb). > > Using the CB between different layers is very fragile and I would like > to avoid it. Note that the skb can pass various layers until hitting the > classifier, each of which can decide to memset() the CB. > > Anyway, I think I have a better alternative. I added the 'l2...

On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 07:08:47PM +0300, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote: > On 18/05/2023 14:33, Ido Schimmel wrote: > > diff --git a/net/bridge/br_input.c b/net/bridge/br_input.c > > index fc17b9fd93e6..d8ab5890cbe6 100644 > > --- a/net/bridge/br_input.c > > +++ b/net/bridge/br_input.c > > @@ -334,6 +334,7 @@ static rx_handler_result_t br_handle_frame(struct sk_buff