[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1481120298.4930.3.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2016 06:18:18 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Zhang Shengju <zhangshengju@...s.chinamobile.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next] icmp: correct return value of icmp_rcv()
On Wed, 2016-12-07 at 14:52 +0800, Zhang Shengju wrote:
> Currently, icmp_rcv() always return zero on a packet delivery upcall.
>
> To make its behavior more compliant with the way this API should be
> used, this patch changes this to let it return NET_RX_SUCCESS when the
> packet is proper handled, and NET_RX_DROP otherwise.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhang Shengju <zhangshengju@...s.chinamobile.com>
> ---
> net/ipv4/icmp.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/icmp.c b/net/ipv4/icmp.c
> index 691146a..f79d7a8 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/icmp.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/icmp.c
> @@ -1047,12 +1047,12 @@ int icmp_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb)
>
> if (success) {
> consume_skb(skb);
> - return 0;
> + return NET_RX_SUCCESS;
> }
>
> drop:
> kfree_skb(skb);
> - return 0;
> + return NET_RX_DROP;
> csum_error:
> __ICMP_INC_STATS(net, ICMP_MIB_CSUMERRORS);
> error:
I am curious, what external/visible effects do you expect from such a
change ?
We now have a very precise monitoring of where packets are dropped
(consume_skb()/kfree_skb())
Powered by blists - more mailing lists