Am 28.02.25 um 20:49 schrieb Martin KaFai Lau:
> On 2/27/25 6:23 AM, Marcus Wichelmann wrote:
>> When the XDP metadata area was used, it is expected that the same
>> metadata can also be accessed from TC, as can be read in the description
>> of the bpf_xdp_adjust_meta helper function. In the tun driver, this was
>> not yet implemented.
>>
>> To make this work, the skb that is being built on XDP_PASS should know
>> of the current size of the metadata area. This is ensured by adding
>> calls to skb_metadata_set. For the tun_xdp_one code path, an additional
>> check is necessary to handle the case where the externally initialized
>> xdp_buff has no metadata support (xdp->data_meta == xdp->data + 1).
>>
>> More information about this feature can be found in the commit message
>> of commit de8f3a83b0a0 ("bpf: add meta pointer for direct access").
>> > Signed-off-by: Marcus Wichelmann <marcus.wichelmann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Reviewed-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Acked-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/tun.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++---
>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c
>> index 4ec8fbd93c8d..70208b3a2e93 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/tun.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/tun.c
>
> The changes have conflicts with the commit 2506251e81d1 ("tun: Decouple vnet handling").
>
> It is better to rebase the works onto the bpf-next/net,
> i.e. the "net" branch instead of the "master" branch.
Alright, will do that. Should I send it as a v5 and still with "PATCH bpf-next"
in the header or something else?
Thanks!
Marcus
