netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 0/2] socket statistics for ss

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: <20180509114456.0303a026@xeon-e3>
Date:   Wed, 9 May 2018 11:44:56 -0700
From:   Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
To:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, gerrit@....abdn.ac.uk, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru,
        yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        dccp@...r.kernel.org, Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 0/2] socket statistics for ss

On Wed, 9 May 2018 10:53:58 -0700
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:

> On 05/09/2018 10:31 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 May 2018 10:18:23 -0700
> > Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> On 05/09/2018 08:22 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> >>  
> >>> I am not sure if these patches are worth applying.
> >>> The 'ss -s' command has had missing values since 2.4 kernel.
> >>> And the first complaints came in only this year.
> >>>
> >>> Another alternative would be just to remove these fields from ss -s
> >>> output and move on.
> >>>     
> >>
> >> Anyway your patches are not netns ready, so lets remove these fields from ss.
> >>
> >> Or you have to spend _much_ more time on writing and testing the kernel part.
> >>
> >> Thanks.  
> > 
> > The patches only expose the existing TCP socket accounting infrastructure.
> > Several other pieces that sockstat has are not netns aware.
> > That is a completely different problem.  
> 
> 
> Adding a new field counting 'bounds ports' without being netns ready is a total mistake,
> as it is useless by current standards.
> 
> The first thing that users will do is add proper netns support, with extra complexity in the kernel.
> 
> So, instead of pushing some incomplete feature, trying to fool ourselves with a sentiment of 'small cost'
> that will later need another 100 lines of code in the kernel, please give us the complete picture.
> 
> I am just saying, you can of course ignore my feedback.

The current TCP hashinfo should be moved into netns. The current method of scanning and matching
by net namespace is a scalability issue now.