RE: [patch v1, kernel version 3.2.1] rtnetlink workaround aroundthe skb buff size issue

From: Rose, Gregory V
Date: Mon Feb 06 2012 - 13:36:14 EST

> -----Original Message-----
> From: steweg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:steweg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Štefan Gula
> Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 10:32 AM
> To: Rose, Gregory V
> Cc: David Miller; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [patch v1, kernel version 3.2.1] rtnetlink workaround around
> the skb buff size issue
> 2012/2/6 Rose, Gregory V <gregory.v.rose@xxxxxxxxx>:
> > That is exactly my approach.  We currently have a *bug* in the kernel
> that this patch is addressing.  The kernel is attempting to provide too
> much information for the netlink interface to handle and it's breaking
> things.  So what I want to do is fix the immediate problem while still
> providing a way for folks to get the information they need.  I've
> accomplished this by doing exactly what Dave asked me to do, provide a
> filter that defaults to off and then provide a way for the user to request
> discrete chunks of information in the dump that won't exceed the netlink
> buffer limits.
> >
> > The patch is fairly unobtrusive and simple to understand.
> >
> > I appreciate that it doesn't do all that you'd like to see done and I
> see no reason why you couldn't go on and develop the extended features
> that you would like to see, correct?  There's nothing in my patch that
> would prevent that so far as I can tell, although I'm not that familiar
> with your requirements or proposals yet.
> Greg, your patch is completely ok for filtering. I like that thing. I
> am just stating that it doesn't eliminate every possible option that
> can happen so I believe we should also have method for using cycles -
> that's what my patch is doing. So I believe both approaches should be
> applied.

OK, good deal. I'll go ahead and finish up my kernel patch and the associated iproute2 patch.


- Greg

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at