Re: [ATM] who 'owns' the skb created by drivers/atm?

• Next message: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: Bugs sitting in RESOLVED state"
• Previous message: Jeff Garzik: "Re: ioctl32 consolidation"
• In reply to: chas williams: "[ATM] who 'owns' the skb created by drivers/atm?"
• Next in thread: David S. Miller: "Re: [ATM] who 'owns' the skb created by drivers/atm?"
• Reply: David S. Miller: "Re: [ATM] who 'owns' the skb created by drivers/atm?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, 20 Feb 2003, chas williams wrote:

> its my understanding is that you can't use skb->cb unless you created
> the skb. well atm created the skb and filled in ->cb. it seems ip
> doesn't know its sharing this skb with the atm layer and doesnt clone
> the skb in ip_rcv(). there seems to be an implicit understanding that
> skb's created by ethernet drivers are 'owned' by the ip layer and shouldnt
> touch skb->cb.
>

skb->cb is owned by whatever layer is currently processing the skb.

- James

-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@intercode.com.au>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

• Next message: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: Bugs sitting in RESOLVED state"
• Previous message: Jeff Garzik: "Re: ioctl32 consolidation"
• In reply to: chas williams: "[ATM] who 'owns' the skb created by drivers/atm?"
• Next in thread: David S. Miller: "Re: [ATM] who 'owns' the skb created by drivers/atm?"
• Reply: David S. Miller: "Re: [ATM] who 'owns' the skb created by drivers/atm?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Feb 23 2003 - 22:00:32 EST