I didn't realize it until Lev pointed out that this reply yesterday didn't go to the list. FTR, copying to the list.
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Selva Nair <selva.n...@gmail.com> Date: Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 9:42 AM Subject: Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Print DCO client stats on SIGUSR2 To: Lev Stipakov <l...@openvpn.net> > > > >> + status_printf(so, "TCP/UDP read bytes," counter_format, > c->c2.link_read_bytes + c->c2.dco_read_bytes); > >> + status_printf(so, "TCP/UDP write bytes," counter_format, > c->c2.link_write_bytes + c->c2.dco_write_bytes); > > > > Same here -- have a place to read the total count from independent of > dco. > > But what is wrong in fetching dco stats when we need them? What is the > advantage of timer? > What happens when we have three other drivers like DCO? Not saying that will ever happen, but using that as an example to clarify why I think this is "wrong" style. That said, I agree why a timer may not be a good idea either. If an approach that can keep internal details "private" is going to be too complex, we can live with this. Selva
_______________________________________________ Openvpn-devel mailing list Openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-devel
