Re: [PATCH IPV6 1/1] ipv6: allocate enough headroom in ip6_finish_output2()

[Vasily Averin]

On 7/7/21 8:41 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On 7/7/21 6:42 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> On Wed, 7 Jul 2021 08:45:13 -0600 David Ahern wrote:
>>> On 7/7/21 8:04 AM, Vasily Averin wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/net/ipv6/ip6_output.c b/net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
>>>> index ff4f9eb..e5af740 100644
>>>> --- a/net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
>>>> +++ b/net/ipv6/ip6_output.c
>>>> @@ -61,9 +61,24 @@ static int ip6_finish_output2(struct net *net, struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *
>>>>  	struct dst_entry *dst = skb_dst(skb);
>>>>  	struct net_device *dev = dst->dev;
>>>>  	const struct in6_addr *nexthop;
>>>> +	unsigned int hh_len = LL_RESERVED_SPACE(dev);
>>>>  	struct neighbour *neigh;
>>>>  	int ret;
>>>>  
>>>> +	/* Be paranoid, rather than too clever. */
>>>> +	if (unlikely(skb_headroom(skb) < hh_len && dev->header_ops)) {
>>>> +		struct sk_buff *skb2;
>>>> +
>>>> +		skb2 = skb_realloc_headroom(skb, LL_RESERVED_SPACE(dev));  
>>>
>>> why not use hh_len here?
>>
>> Is there a reason for the new skb? Why not pskb_expand_head()?
> 
> pskb_expand_head() might crash, if skb is shared.
> 
> We possibly can add a helper, factorizing all this,
> and eventually use pskb_expand_head() if safe.

Thank you for feedback, I'll do it in 2nd version.
	Vasily Averin