Re: [patch] packet.7: PACKET_LOSS has inverse meaning

[Carsten Andrich <carsten.andrich-hs6bpBdVsEZfm0AUMx9V0g@public.gmane.org>]

"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" schrieb:
> On 04/23/2014 09:10 PM, Carsten Andrich wrote:
>> [...]
>> Unfortunately my experience with Linux packet sockets is very limited. I
>> messed with them a few times, but only really started using SOCK_RAW
>> packet sockets (including PACKET_MMAP) a few weeks ago (as a part of my
>> Bachelor's thesis). I haven't looked at the linux (networking) code
>> before Monday, when I tried to figure out if either packet.7 or I was
>> wrong regarding PACKET_LOSS. And I've never even touched SOCK_DGRAM.
>>
>> All this doesn't exactly qualify me for the job :)
> 
> Maybe, maybe not. On the other hand, I have the idea (may be wrong) 
> that Vince Weaver was a beginner with perf_event_open() when he
> started sending me patches. He's continued doing so with a vengeance
> (thanks again Vince!). That has been a great help, since 
> perf_event_open() is a complex, constantly evolving API surface, and
> I just don't have the time to track the details. The API described in 
> packet.7 has not changed much over time, but the man page has seen
> little love over the years. An inquiring mind, willing to test things
> and read code are the main prerequisites. ANd it sounds like some 
> others might chip with help and Acks.

We could give it a shot. It may be of an advantage to not have a deep
understanding of the code driving the interface one is trying to
document, as to not leave out aspects which appear to be self-evident.

It would make sense to limit our efforts to getting the PACKET_MMAP
documentation in good shape, at least for now.
I'd definitely require a reviewer (who's willing to answer some
questions in advance) with a good understanding of at_packet.c and since
I've already mentioned the need for synchronizing packet.7 and
packet_mmap.txt we'd also need a decent plan how to distribute/share
information among both.

I'll try to come up with some ideas once I've handed in my Bachelor's
thesis (deadline ends 3 weeks from now).
Is there anyone else from the kernel-side we'd need to involve besides
Willem and Daniel?

>> Maybe we should continue this discussion in private, so we don't bore
>> everyone to death.
> 
> Drop me a private mail if you want, but there are also benefits 
> to public conversations ;-).
I just don't want to annoy anyone, since we kinda force Willem, Daniel
and now Vince to read this :)

Cheers,
Carsten
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html