[SOCK]: Introduce sk_receive_skb
Its common enough to to justify that, TCP still can't use it as it has the
prequeueing stuff, still to be made generic in the not so distant future :-)
Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@mandriva.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
diff --git a/net/dccp/ipv4.c b/net/dccp/ipv4.c
index c363051..99e8afa 100644
--- a/net/dccp/ipv4.c
+++ b/net/dccp/ipv4.c
@@ -914,7 +914,6 @@
{
const struct dccp_hdr *dh;
struct sock *sk;
- int rc;
/* Step 1: Check header basics: */
@@ -984,28 +983,10 @@
goto do_time_wait;
}
- if (!xfrm4_policy_check(sk, XFRM_POLICY_IN, skb)) {
- dccp_pr_debug("xfrm4_policy_check failed\n");
+ if (!xfrm4_policy_check(sk, XFRM_POLICY_IN, skb))
goto discard_and_relse;
- }
- if (sk_filter(sk, skb, 0)) {
- dccp_pr_debug("sk_filter failed\n");
- goto discard_and_relse;
- }
-
- skb->dev = NULL;
-
- bh_lock_sock(sk);
- rc = 0;
- if (!sock_owned_by_user(sk))
- rc = dccp_v4_do_rcv(sk, skb);
- else
- sk_add_backlog(sk, skb);
- bh_unlock_sock(sk);
-
- sock_put(sk);
- return rc;
+ return sk_receive_skb(sk, skb);
no_dccp_socket:
if (!xfrm4_policy_check(NULL, XFRM_POLICY_IN, skb))