[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4315b50e-9077-cc4b-010b-b38a2fbb7168@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2022 21:35:47 -0600
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, menglong8.dong@...il.com
Cc: pabeni@...hat.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, mingo@...hat.com,
xeb@...l.ru, davem@...emloft.net, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
imagedong@...cent.com, edumazet@...gle.com, kafai@...com,
talalahmad@...gle.com, keescook@...omium.org, alobakin@...me,
flyingpeng@...cent.com, mengensun@...cent.com,
dongli.zhang@...cle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, benbjiang@...cent.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 3/3] net: icmp: add reasons of the skb drops
to icmp protocol
On 3/16/22 9:18 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>
> I guess this set raises the follow up question to Dave if adding
> drop reasons to places with MIB exception stats means improving
> the granularity or one MIB stat == one reason?
>
There are a few examples where multiple MIB stats are bumped on a drop,
but the reason code should always be set based on first failure. Did you
mean something else with your question?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists