linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net 0/4] net: add rx

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160128060215.GB59058@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 28 Jan 2016 01:02:15 -0500
From:	Jarod Wilson <jarod@...hat.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>,
	Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@...il.com>,
	Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
	Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/4] net: add rx_unhandled stat counter

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 01:09:47PM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-01-27 at 15:21 -0500, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> > index 289c231..7973ab5 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> > @@ -180,6 +180,7 @@ struct net_device_stats {
> >  	unsigned long	tx_window_errors;
> >  	unsigned long	rx_compressed;
> >  	unsigned long	tx_compressed;
> > +	unsigned long	rx_unhandled;
> >  };
> >  
> 
> This structure is deprecated, please do not add new fields in it,
> as it will increase netlink answers for no good reason.
> 
> rtnl_link_stats64 is what really matters these days.

I'll respin the set without that, along with s/unhandled/nohandler/, which
I somehow got screwed up in my head and realized a split second after
hitting send. Outside of that, does this approach look sane? Should I
bother with touching /proc/net/dev output or not?

Thanks much,

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jarod@...hat.com