From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: connbytes & 64bit counters Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2007 06:18:46 +0200 Message-ID: <46A18926.6040402@trash.net> References: <453FE325.1040502@trash.net> <45462043.5010207@trash.net> <4565AAC7.8050702@trash.net> <45660CD5.1090405@netfilter.org> <4566B6B6.4060808@trash.net> <45A4EBC8.60304@trash.net> <45AB919A.4030100@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Harald Welte , netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org, Krzysztof Oledzki , Pablo Neira Ayuso To: Krzysztof Oledzki Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org Krzysztof Oledzki wrote: > Errr, incomplete patch, sorry... This one should work. > > [NETFILTER]: Reimplementation of 64bit counters for bytes/packets > accounting I thought about this today, but came to no conclusion. We have ct_extend now, allowing to allocate the counters dynamically for new conntracks, and the only reasonable thing IMO (considering distributors that waste 16 bytes per conntrack for a feature pratically *nobody* uses, with your patch that actually fixes a regression 32 byte) would be to make accounting optional and triggered by a target in the raw table. Its so far used by default and the counters are visible through /proc and ctnetlink though. So this would break compatibility. OTOH I think its totally ridiculous to waste this much memory for something pratically nobody uses. So my current opinion is between just breaking compatibility (with some grace period perhaps) and trying to behave half-way compatible when ctnetlink is loaded. I don't think the second option will work though. And frankly, the current code it totally broken, it will send a COUNTER_OVERFLOW event *for each packet* when the counters exceed 2^31. So its really questionable if anyone actually uses this, without further patches. Opinions are welcome.