Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 2/3] openvswitch: Use is_skb_forwardable() for length check.

From: Jiri Benc <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 09:49:02 +0100

On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 15:50:41 -0500, Eric Garver wrote:
> Should we not also follow the "skbs are untagged" approach that the rest
> of the kernel uses? I'm referring to patches 1 and 2 form Jiri's series
> "openvswitch: make vlan handling consistent".
> 
> With those changes is_skb_forwardable() would behave as expected here.

Yes, this would make the check easy and consistent (and was actually my
original motivation for the mentioned patchset).

Still, is_skb_forwardable would be off by 4 bytes. I wonder whether
it's not off even for the bridge case. And dev_forward_skb seems to be
fishy, too.

 Jiri