On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 10:16 AM Jakub Kicinski <k...@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 08:26:04 -0800 s...@google.com wrote:
> > On 02/02, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 11:06 PM Jakub Kicinski <k...@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > Eric, any thoughts?
> >
> > > I do not use these tracepoints in production scripts, but I wonder if
> > > existing tools could break after this change ?
> >
> > > Or do we consider tracepoints format is not part of the ABI and can be
> > > arbitrarily changed by anyone ?
> >
> > They are not ABI and since we are extending tracepoints with additional
> > info (and not removing any existing fields) it shouldn't be a problem.
>
> Okay, but we should perhaps add the field at the end just to be on the
> safe side (and avoid weird alignment of the IP addresses).
I added it after dport to be consistent with the earlier patch to
sock:inet_sock_set_state
https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/870492/.
