On 3/27/07, Patrick McHardy [off-list ref] wrote:

Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:

quoted

On 3/27/07, David Miller [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <redacted>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:41:48 -0300

quoted

+static inline void skb_move_linear_data(const struct sk_buff *skb,
+                                     const int from_offset,
+                                     const int to_offset,
+                                     const unsigned int len)
+{
+     memcpy(skb->data + to_offset, skb->data + from_offset, len);
+}
+

What do you intend to use this for?  There are no users in
your patch, and I'd be fearful of overlapping cases (which
ought to be common for anything using this) which therefore
would require use of memmove() instead of memcpy().

How about we just leave out interfaces until we have a use
case?

I don't want to intend anything with this, was just a brain fart, a
failed attempt to convince me that this was needed, I apologise for
letting this sleep thru, will remove and resubmit, ok?

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.

- Arnaldo