[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220316210534.06b6cfe0@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2022 21:05:34 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>
Cc: menglong8.dong@...il.com, 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 Wed, 16 Mar 2022 21:35:47 -0600 David Ahern wrote:
> 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?
I meant whether we want to differentiate between TYPE, and BROADCAST or
whatever other possible invalid protocol cases we can get here or just
dump them all into a single protocol error code.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists