netdev - Re: [PATCH] IP: Increment INADDRERRORS if routing for a packet is not successful

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: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1006021140320.30182@router.home>
Date:	Wed, 2 Jun 2010 11:49:18 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	shemminger@...tta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IP: Increment INADDRERRORS if routing for a packet is
 not successful

On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, Eric Dumazet wrote:

> take a look at
>
> http://www.redhat.com/docs/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/html/SystemTap_Beginners_Guide/useful-systemtap-scripts.html#dropwatch

System tap? Oh no. Also skbs may be freed for legitimate reasons. The
point is that the loss detection needs to be usable for a regular mortal.
With the counters in /proc/net/snmp you have something that is easy to
handle.

The approach with systemtap will need lots of work to both get the tracing
environment setup (local competence in systemtap) and participation by a
developer to figure out what the output means. Then there is also the
additional code overhead that you do not want by default in the kernel. So
we would need a different kernel for diagnostics.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html