linux-kernel - Re: [bpf-next 1/2] tcp: replace SOCK_DEBUG() with tcp

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: <CAADnVQKhEshkWSDeYJ92pWnJjqawGSScBH+LU4iXsqwwxYjO9g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 12 Feb 2019 18:49:02 -0800
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc:     Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, Lawrence Brakmo <brakmo@...com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, shaoyafang@...iglobal.com
Subject: Re: [bpf-next 1/2] tcp: replace SOCK_DEBUG() with tcp_stats()

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 6:15 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Do not add more debugging stuff unless you can demonstrate
> they actually allowed you to find a real bug and that you sent a
> public fix for it.
>
> Just adding "cool stuff" in TCP stack does not please me, it is only
> more complexity for unproven gain.

I agree.
I don't see why this debugging of 'abnormal TCP' cannot be done
with kprobes and tracepoints.
Instrumenting every tcp counter increment is overkill.