Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 16 Mar 2002 22:38:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 16 Mar 2002 22:38:21 -0500 Received: from rudy.mif.pg.gda.pl ([153.19.42.16]:18187 "EHLO rudy.mif.pg.gda.pl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 16 Mar 2002 22:38:12 -0500 Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 04:37:26 +0100 (CET) From: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Tomasz_K=B3oczko?= To: Keith Owens cc: Petko Manolov , Alan Cox , "David S. Miller" , Subject: Re: debugging eth driver In-Reply-To: <25257.1016329003@ocs3.intra.ocs.com.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 17 Mar 2002, Keith Owens wrote: > On Sat, 16 Mar 2002 10:52:10 -0800, > Petko Manolov wrote: > >Alan Cox wrote: > >>>How am i supposed to get a feedback from the upper layers? > >> > >> Keep an eye on /proc/net/snmp > > > >It isn't very readable format.. Any other way or i have to > >read the code and see what the messages mean? > > Quick and dirty script to neatly format /proc/net/snmp. BTW, there is > a mismatch in the ICMP list on 2.4.17, 26 headers and 27 values :(. BTW. I dont't know how it looks in 2.4.x but in 2.2.x format /proc/net/snmp and /proc/net/snmp6 is diffrent. Is it bug or feacture ? :) kloczek -- ----------------------------------------------------------- *Ludzie nie maj? problem?w, tylko sobie sami je stwarzaj?* ----------------------------------------------------------- Tomasz K?oczko, sys adm @zie.pg.gda.pl|*e-mail: kloczek@rudy.mif.pg.gda.pl* - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/