From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 08:23:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 08:23:09 -0400 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:19641 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 10 Jun 2002 08:23:05 -0400 Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 05:18:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20020610.051857.97850707.davem@redhat.com> To: ltd@cisco.com Cc: greearb@candelatech.com, mark@mark.mielke.cc, cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: RFC: per-socket statistics on received/dropped packets From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020610220015.040aff60@mira-sjcm-3.cisco.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Lincoln Dale Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2002 22:03:25 +1000 would you be willing to accept a patch that enables per-socket accounting with a CONFIG_ option? What is the point? If all the dists will enable it then everybody eats the overhead. If the dists don't enable it, how useful is it and what's so wrong with it being an external patch people just apply when they need to diagnose something like this?