On Aug 30, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Thu, 2018-08-30 at 11:00 +0200, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > > On Thu, 2018-08-30 at 10:50 +0200, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > > > > > > > ack, I agree. Do you want I send a patch to fix it? > > > > > > I have it written now, I'll just commit & send it out. > > > > Sound good, thx :) > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, not sure I follow? "head" is the A-MSDU, containing the A-MSDU > > > > > header and the first subframe in skb->data (and/or frags), with the > > > > > subframes 2..N in the fraglist. > > > > > > > > > > So I think this is right? > > > > > > > > yep, correct. But when we are analyzing the second subframe what is the correct value for 'n'? > > > > 1 or 2? At the moment I guess it is set to 1 if frag_tail is NULL for head. > > > > > > Ah. I guess you're right. So basically setting max_subframes to 1 > > > doesn't avoid A-MSDUs completely, since n will still be 1 when we get > > > here ... good point, care to send a patch? > > > > > > > ack, I will send a patch for it > > The same is true for nfrags, btw, no? I do not think so since for nfrags we have: nfrags = 1 + skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frags; nfrags += 1 + skb_shinfo(head)->nr_frags; and even if frag_tail is NULL we will have nfrags = 2. Agree? Lorenzo > > johannes
