On Tuesday 24 November 2009, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > @@ -29,9 +29,16 @@
> > #include <linux/if_link.h>
> > #include <linux/if_macvlan.h>
> > #include <net/rtnetlink.h>
> > +#include <net/xfrm.h>
>
> Do we really need this?
Not any more. I originally did secpath_reset here, but that is now moved
to dev_forward_skb() in net/core/dev.c so I'll remove the include here.
> > @@ -129,11 +137,14 @@ static inline void macvlan_count_rx(const struct macvlan_dev *vlan, int length,
> > }
> >
> > static int macvlan_broadcast_one(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev,
> > - const struct ethhdr *eth)
> > + const struct ethhdr *eth, int local)
>
> bool local?
Already changed as a reply to Eric's comments
> > @@ -159,8 +172,12 @@ static void macvlan_broadcast(struct sk_buff *skb,
> >
> > for (i = 0; i < MACVLAN_HASH_SIZE; i++) {
> > hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(vlan, n, &port->vlan_hash[i], hlist) {
> > + if ((vlan->dev == src) || !(vlan->mode & mode))
>
> Please remove those unnecessary parentheses around the
> device comparison.
Ok. I usually prefer to have some extra parentheses in places that not
everyone finds obvious but these are pretty clear.
>
> The '|' should go on the first line.
>
> Multi-line comments should begin every line with '*'.
>
> Please align the mode values (in all cases above) to the arguments
> on the line above.
ok
> > +static int macvlan_queue_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
> > +{
> > + const struct macvlan_dev *vlan = netdev_priv(dev);
> > + const struct macvlan_port *port = vlan->port;
> > + const struct macvlan_dev *dest;
> > +
> > + if (vlan->mode == MACVLAN_MODE_BRIDGE) {
> > + const struct ethhdr *eth = (void *)skb->data;
>
> eth_hdr()?
This is done before calling eth_type_trans and skb->mac_header
appears to be uninitialized then, which gave me an instant kernel
panic here.
> > + dest = macvlan_hash_lookup(port, eth->h_dest);
> > + if (dest && dest->mode == MACVLAN_MODE_BRIDGE) {
> > + int length = skb->len + ETH_HLEN;
>
> unsigned int for length values please.
ok
Thanks for the detailed review,
Arnd <><
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
