lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH net-next] net/smc: Introduce SMC-related proc files
From


On 11.09.23 09:20, Wen Gu wrote:
> This patch introduces /proc/net/smc4 and /proc/net/smc6 files to report
> statistic information of SMC connections.
>
> Compared with 'smcss' command in smc-tools, getting SMC connections via
> proc files is not efficient. However, in some container scenarios, some
> dependencies are lacked for compiling and using smc-tools. In this case,
> using proc files to check SMC connections becomes a simple and fast way.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wen Gu <guwen@linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> include/net/smc.h | 5 +-
> net/smc/Makefile | 2 +-
> net/smc/af_smc.c | 22 ++++-
> net/smc/smc_diag.c | 29 +++---
> net/smc/smc_proc.c | 283 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> net/smc/smc_proc.h | 35 +++++++
> 6 files changed, 355 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 net/smc/smc_proc.c
> create mode 100644 net/smc/smc_proc.h
>

Hi Wen,

I can understand your problem and frustration. However, there are two
reasons I'm not really convinced by the proc file method:
1) AFAI, the proc method could consume many CPU time especially in case
with a log of sockets to read the pseudo files.
2) We have already implemented the complex netlink method on the same
purpose. I see the double expense to main the code.

Then the question is if the lack of dependency issue can be handle
somehow, or the proc method is the only way to achieve this purpose?

Any opinion is welcome!

Thanks,
Wenjia

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-09-11 23:51    [W:0.069 / U:0.528 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site