Em Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 07:16:14PM +0300, Pavel Emelyanov escreveu: > Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > Em Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 01:50:04PM -0200, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: > >> Em Wed, Nov 07, 2007 at 06:32:51PM +0300, Pavel Emelyanov escreveu: > >>> This one is used only under ifdef PACKET_REFCNT_DEBUG in > >>> printk and is not needed otherwise. So hide all this stuff > >>> under the PACKET_REFCNT_DEBUG. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Look at sk_refcnt_debug_inc, etc and you'll se a more standard way. I > >> forgot to make this when making all protocol families use sk_prot, even > >> if just partially :-) > > > > As a bonus you'll get this information on /proc/net/protocols, removing > > '-1' from PACKET column for "sockets". > > Hm... I actually thought about this, but I decided that packet > sockets were not accounted in this way deliberately. > > So, shall I break this "compatibility" (-1 in proc) and provide > a packet socket number in this file?
Humm, my bad, the sockets column in /proc/net/protocols doesn't come from prot->socks, it comes from prot->sockets_allocated. But the suggestion for using sk_refcnt_debug_inc stands, it is there for when we want to do what the code in pf_packet does: refcount debugging, in fact that code most probably was copy'n'pasted from other, older protocols. BTW, IPX also uses this technique, patches are welcome to make it also use common infrastructure :-) - Arnaldo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
