On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 01:28:33PM +0200, Ido Schimmel wrote: > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 06:47:56AM -0400, Neil Horman wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 11:31:43AM +0200, Ido Schimmel wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 03:29:25PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > > > In net/Kconfig, NET_DEVLINK implies NET_DROP_MONITOR. > > > > > > > > The original behavior of the 'imply' keyword prevents NET_DROP_MONITOR > > > > from being 'm' when NET_DEVLINK=y. > > > > > > > > With the planned Kconfig change that relaxes the 'imply', the > > > > combination of NET_DEVLINK=y and NET_DROP_MONITOR=m would be allowed. > > > > > > > > Use IS_REACHABLE() to avoid the vmlinux link error for this case. > > > > > > > > Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Thanks, Masahiro. > > > > > > Neil, Jiri, another option (long term) is to add a raw tracepoint (not > > > part of ABI) in devlink and have drop monitor register its probe on it > > > when monitoring. > > > > > > Two advantages: > > > 1. Consistent with what drop monitor is already doing with kfree_skb() > > > tracepoint > > > 2. We can remove 'imply NET_DROP_MONITOR' altogether > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > Agreed, I think I like this implementation better. > > OK, but I don't want to block Masahiro. I think we can go with his patch > and then I'll add the raw tracepoint in the next release. > Yeah, ok, I can agree with that Acked-by: Neil Horman <nhorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
