From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] [SK_BUFF]: Introduce skb_copy_from_linear_data{_offset} Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 23:35:07 +0200 Message-ID: <46098E0B.4030805@trash.net> References: <20070327194148.GC20303@ghostprotocols.net> <20070327.140749.106434705.davem@davemloft.net> <39e6f6c70703271422i3881fc6bw18480e8f1b553e27@mail.gmail.com> <46098B74.8060404@trash.net> <39e6f6c70703271433h5ce06dabv521eaa4436727164@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:35092 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965521AbXC0VgU (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 17:36:20 -0400 In-Reply-To: <39e6f6c70703271433h5ce06dabv521eaa4436727164@mail.gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > On 3/27/07, Patrick McHardy wrote: > >> nf_nat_helper.c:mangle_content() could make use of this, but it >> would need memmove. Something to do this with non-linear packets >> would be even cooler :) > > > Damn, that was so fast man! For the qeth case that motivated me to try > the leftover it was like: memcpy is the fastest way, memmove would be > more costly but more general, when in doubt I just droppped the users > without removing the infrastructure, nah, lets leave this for another > day, for now I'll just drop the non-used -new infrastrucure and > resubmit. Yes, as long as it doesn't help with anything else it doesn't seem too useful. It did motivate me to try the non-linear skb mangling though :)