packets due to LSO, and I don't want to drop
all of them; just a few (2--3) packets.
Can the effect be achieved if I modify skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_segs, or nr_frags?
Thanks,
--
Vimal
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.
Hi Mulyadi,
You were right. I found this code, which is called from
ptrace_attach function:
http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/kernel/ptrace.c#L41
Thanks :)
On 27 February 2012 08:45, Vimal wrote:
> Hi Mulyadi,
>
> On 26 February 2012 23:48, Mulyadi Santosa wrote:
>> I am
hat the notion of a parent seems a bit ambiguous when
a process is being ptraced.
ptrace is what I found when looking through some websites, and you may
very well be correct. But as always, it is good to confirm through
code. :) Let me try checking the ptrace functions.
able to find where the task's parent is updated.
Is there something I'm missing?
Thanks,
--
Vimal
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
on the same CPU, which
makes it difficult to reason serialising locks to per-CPU data
structures.
Any ideas?
Thanks,
--
Vimal
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
Hi Mulyadi
On 7 December 2011 10:48, Mulyadi Santosa wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 06:08, Vimal wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am trying to allocate a per-cpu variable from a softirq context, but
>> the documentation for "alloc_percpu" says that the variable
Hi,
I am trying to allocate a per-cpu variable from a softirq context, but
the documentation for "alloc_percpu" says that the variable is
allocated in GFP_KERNEL context, which can sleep.
Is there a way around this?
Thanks,
A (pointer dereference) bug in my kernel module crashed the system,
and when I rebooted, a network PCI device went missing. Several
reboots didn't bring back the device, but a cold reboot did! I am
curious: what could have caused this issue?
--
Hi all,
In the Linux networking code, I see a lot of comments that say "Must
be called with RTNL lock."
What is this lock? I tried searching for it but couldn't find any
explanation on what it is...
Thanks
--
Vimal
___
Kernelnewbi
od)
2. When I do: ethtool -K tso on, I don't see an error message. (good)
3. When I query: ethtool -k , I don't see TSO set on (bad)
4. When I check dmesg, I don't see that the "set_tso" function has not
been invoked. (bad)
Am I doing someth
?
Thanks,
--
Vimal
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
it's now a little be clear to you.
>
Yes, it's much clear now. Thanks a lot!
--
Vimal
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
most all operations in the TCP code start from a "struct sock".
Are the "struct file" and "struct sock" somehow connected?
Thanks,
--
Vimal
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
for pointing it out!
>
>>But in case (2),
>
> excellent thinking. I place my bet on ksoftirqd
>
Thanks. I think it makes sense. Let me think of a way to actually
confirm this. If you know of a way, do chip in :-)
thanks,
--
Vimal
_
now which
application is going to receive this packet. Whom do these cycles get
charged to?
Thanks,
--
Vimal
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
kb_copy_datagram_iovec(..) is called ultimately (fn
defn: http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/net/ipv4/tcp.c#L1668).
I could hook onto this function using kprobes and get the data that is read.
Thanks!
--
Vimal
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnew
en, one would have
to enumerate all possible syscalls that the application can issue to
read data. For e.g., it could use read(), recvfrom(), recvmsg(), or
even syscall(syscall#, args...)
I wonder if LD_PRELOAD can be done on a program without shutting it
down. ptrace fits the bill here, except for the
lush/etc)
In short, there is a lot of state and complex logic which act on the
packets before it is seen by the application.
Given the complexity (such as wide variations in TCP implementation),
I am not sure if reimplementing them is a good idea, even if it's
poss
th this complexity?
It's like the action of "tee" on any socket/file descriptor in the system.
--
Vimal
___
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
o interact with scheduler or something other
> to interact with , regarding this problem?
Do check the function tracing framework in the Linux Kernel.
Links:
* http://lwn.net/Articles/322666/
* http://lwn.net/Articles/290277/
sched_switch is the tracer you're
Yes, tun/tap should be easy to implement in user space. I was
initially looking at off-the-shelf components.
I looked at the source code of IP in IP tunnel and modified it
accordingly to create a kernel module as per my requirements.
Thanks!
--
Vimal
e original source IP.
At the receiver, assume that there is a stack that understands this
special IPinIP packet and has a way to handle it.
If it's too specific, then I do not mind implementing it.
Thanks,
--
Vimal
___
Kernelnewbies mailing lis
22 matches
Mail list logo