From: Julien Gomes <jul...@arista.com> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2017 10:52:26 -0700
> On 06/23/2017 10:39 AM, David Miller wrote: > >> From: Julien Gomes <jul...@arista.com> >> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 10:58:10 -0700 >> >>> When sending a cache report on mroute_sk, mroute will emit a >>> "pending queue full" warning for every error value returned by >>> sock_queue_rcv_skb(). >>> This warning can be misleading, for example on the EPERM error value >>> that sk_filter() can return. >>> >>> Restricting this warning to only ENOMEM or ENOBUFS seems more >>> appropriate. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Julien Gomes <jul...@arista.com> >> Incorrect, no other error codes are possible. >> >> We never attach a socket filter to these kernel internal sockets, >> therefore sk_filter() is not even applicable in this analysis. >> >> Therefore, -ENOBUFS and -ENOMEM are the only errors we can ever see >> returned from sock_queue_rcv_skb(). >> >> This goes for your second patch as well. > > Up to now I would agree, but now that cache reports are also sent > through Netlink, wouldn't it make sense to allow the user of mroute_sk > to attach a filter to it in order to not receive cache reports on it? There is not visibility of this socket outside of the kernel. I doubt it would ever be exported in any way, and until it would be so worrying about this is truly a huge waste of time and developer resources. Thank you.
