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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 00:44:29 +0100 From: Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com> To: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: critic on documentation of the network stack On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 4:23 AM, Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org> wrote: > Hello! > > After net-next is closed I wanted to put the following link here: > > <http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4356053&cid=45184693> > > I don't want to start a flamefest or come too close to someone but I > fear some of the critic is reasonable. Maybe we can do better (I have > to admit, I also hate writing documentation, e.g. have not yet send the > IP_PMTUDISC_INTERFACE man-page patches). > > I try to start with some constructive discussion: > > There are some great features in the network stack that some people miss > because of lack documentation. One possible solution is documentation > directly in the kernel, but mostly this is just written as a reference > and the real wonderful stuff is only achieved by putting lots of those > features correclty together. > > Maybe this is the second or third time this was proposed but I'll try > again: Would it make sense to just start slow and setup a wiki where we > just throw in the various snippets we use for testing while developing > patches, maybe with a bit of background information? This may well attract > interested people outside of netdev@ which could start helping cleaning > up the wiki or add more useful documentation on their own. We could > check from time to time what could be fed back into Documentation/? The > reason why I would definitely help to improve the wiki is because I > am sure I can learn from other setups and testing methodologies, too, > and definitely still have not yet seen everything what is possible with > the linux network stack. I fully agree with you. Kernel features without userspace docs suck. I'm not sure whether a wiki is a good idea but at least the manpages be kept in sync. The tcp socket option TCP_CONGESTION is such a case. Kernel implemenation was added by: commit 5f8ef48d240963093451bcf83df89f1a1364f51d Author: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...l.org> Date: Thu Jun 23 20:37:36 2005 -0700 [TCP]: Allow choosing TCP congestion control via sockopt. Allow using setsockopt to set TCP congestion control to use on a per socket basis. Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...l.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net> Linux manpages tell about the feature since: commit d6d58656220f3ee24990e88dd9f37967a46fb290 Author: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com> Date: Fri Nov 21 12:29:37 2008 -0500 tcp.7: Document /proc file tcp_allowed_congestion_control (new in Linux 2.4.20) Text taken from Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.txt Signed-off-by: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com> and finally: commit bf561a0fbcfed101aea2d523fe5cd50e90273786 Author: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com> Date: Thu Jan 23 05:11:10 2014 +0100 tcp.7: Document TCP_CONGESTION Signed-off-by: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com> A hardcore net/ hacker may know all nice features but joey random network programer just reads the manpages... -- Thanks, //richard -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists