On 05/05/2015 12:10 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
On 05/05/2015 11:26 AM, Tobias Klauser wrote:
On 2015-05-02 at 22:54:50 +0200, Vadim Kochan <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, May 02, 2015 at 07:00:53PM +0200, Tobias Klauser wrote:
On 2015-04-29 at 21:18:24 +0200, Vadim Kochan <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Vadim Kochan <[email protected]>
It might be related to the issue #73 noticed by
Jon Schipp <[email protected]>
where he pointed that netsniff-ng captures some extra packets.
I observed this issue when I captured few Ethernet frames from
wireless device while I was sniffing Netlink monitor device (!!!),
especially under high load traffic (HD Video).
...
The better fix would just be to consolidate pf_socket() and pf_tx_socket()
and allocate both with socket(PF_PACKET, SOCK_RAW, 0). That way, we
should also be able to avoid the synchronize_net() barrier (as po->running
is false at bind time).
If we change pf_socket(), the only thing we need to make sure is that
all such sockets do a proper bind() call before starting to capture
packets, so that we don't break anything.
Vadim, feel free to follow-up on that with a fix based on above suggestion,
as you've already investigated and proposed a first patch.
Thanks,
Daniel
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"netsniff-ng" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
