netdev - Re: [PATCH v6 net-next 4/5] net: page_pool: make stats available just for global pools

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: <Zbt4WaZ7jxjKKuy-@lore-desk>
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2024 11:54:17 +0100
From: Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
	Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo.bianconi@...hat.com>,
	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
	Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
	bpf@...r.kernel.org, willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com,
	jasowang@...hat.com, sdf@...gle.com, ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 net-next 4/5] net: page_pool: make stats available
 just for global pools

> On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 16:32:00 +0100 Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> > > ack from my side if you have some use-cases in mind.
> > > Some questions below:
> > > - can we assume ethtool will be used to report stats just for 'global'
> > >   page_pool (not per-cpu page_pool)?
> > > - can we assume netlink/yaml will be used to report per-cpu page_pool stats?
> > >
> > > I think in the current series we can fix the accounting part (in particular
> > > avoiding memory wasting) and then we will figure out how to report percpu
> > > page_pool stats through netlink/yaml. Agree?  
> > 
> > Deferring the export API to a separate series after this is merged is
> > fine with me.
> 
> +1
> 
> > In which case the *gathering* of statistics could also be
> > deferred (it's not really useful if it can't be exported).
> 
> What do you mean by "gather" here? If we plan to expose them later on 
> I reckon there's no point having this patch which actively optimizes
> them away, no? IOW we should just drop this patch from v7?

ack, I will get rid of it in v7.

Regards,
Lorenzo

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)