| To: | Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: netdev.stats change suggestion |
| From: | Krzysztof Halasa <khc@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | 27 Jan 2002 22:52:06 +0100 |
| Cc: | Donald Becker <becker@xxxxxxxxx>, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Martin Devera <devik@xxxxxx>, davem@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <3C51DA6B.4090302@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.10.10201251551080.743-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3C51DA6B.4090302@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > There's a fairly small difference between wrapping a 32-bit number and > clearing the counters...both ways the reader has to deal with a system > that is not strictly increasing... You do the the crutch of knowing that > if something only wraps (and is not cleared) that you have *at least* > wrapped once.... ... and you can't say for sure that there was no wrap if the previous value was smaller. You may have just missed the wrap. -- Krzysztof Halasa Network Administrator |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: SCTP and IPv6 roadmap, Cacophonix |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] Make netfilter handle SACK in NAT'ed connections (was Re: Fw: oops/bug in tcp, SACK doesn't work?), kuznet |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: netdev.stats change suggestion, Jeff Garzik |
| Next by Thread: | Re: netdev.stats change suggestion, Jeff Garzik |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |