On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:27:53 +0800 menglong8.dong@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > From: Menglong Dong <imagedong@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > In this series patches, reasons for skb drops are added to TCP, IP, dev > and neigh. > > For TCP layer, the path of TCP data receive and enqueue are considered. > However, it's more complex for TCP state processing, as I find that it's > hard to report skb drop reasons to where it is freed. For example, > when skb is dropped in tcp_rcv_state_process(), the reason can be caused > by the call of tcp_v4_conn_request(), and it's hard to return a drop > reason from tcp_v4_conn_request(). So I just skip such case for this > moment. > > For IP layer, skb drop reasons are added to the packet outputting path. > Seems the reasons are not complex, so I didn't split the commits by > functions. > > For neighbour part, SKB_DROP_REASON_NEIGH_FAILED and > SKB_DROP_REASON_NEIGH_QUEUEFULL are added. > > For link layer, reasons are added for both packet inputting and > outputting path. > > The amount of patches in this series seems a bit too many, maybe I should > join some of them? For example, combine the patches of dev to one. This series does not apply cleanly. There's no reason to send 19 patches at a time. Please try to send smaller series, that's are easier to review, under 10 patches preferably, certainly under 15.
