[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89iJw8x-LqgsWOeJQQvgVg6DnL5aBRLi10QN2WBdr+X4k=w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 10:13:02 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com>
Cc: mhiramat@...nel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 3/3] tcp: add location into reset trace process
On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 4:43 AM Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com> wrote:
>
> From: Jason Xing <kernelxing@...cent.com>
>
> In addition to knowing the 4-tuple of the flow which generates RST,
> the reason why it does so is very important because we have some
> cases where the RST should be sent and have no clue which one
> exactly.
>
> Adding location of reset process can help us more, like what
> trace_kfree_skb does.
Well, I would prefer a drop_reason here, even if there is no 'dropped' packet.
This would be more stable than something based on function names that
could be changed.
tracepoints do not have to get ugly, we can easily get stack traces if needed.
perf record -a -g -e tcp:tcp_send_reset ...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists