[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMDZJNW5F3MDPYaRhx1o1ifPXQPnW_fdML=ap+Gis2PG9FB9Pg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 11:48:36 +0800
From: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue@...il.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Qitao Xu <qitao.xu@...edance.com>,
Cong Wang <cong.wang@...edance.com>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Subject: Re: [Patch net-next v2] net_sched: introduce tracepoint trace_qdisc_enqueue()
On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 11:39 AM Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 8:36 PM Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 11:23 AM Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> wrote:
> > > Sure, in that case a different packet is dropped, once again you
> > > can trace it with kfree_skb() if you want. What's the problem?
> > It's ok, but we can make it better. Yunsheng Lin may have explained why?
>
> Why it is better to trace dropped packets both in enqueue and in kfree_skb()?
I mean we can use one tracepoint to know what happened in the queue,
not necessary to trace enqueue and kfree_skb()
If so, we must match when the packet is dropped and what packets. if
we use the return value in trace_qdisc_requeue. It
is easy to know what happened(when, where, what packets were dropped ).
> I fail to see it. You are just asking for duplications. If you do not see it by
> yourself, it means you don't understand or need it at all. ;)
I added the tracepoint in centos 8 4.18 kernel version in our servers
for a long time.
> Thanks.
--
Best regards, Tonghao
Powered by blists - more mailing lists