linux-kernel - Re: rx_packets/bytes stats for error frames

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 14 Mar 2018 10:46:26 +0100
From:   Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>
To:     Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
        Jakob Unterwurzacher <jakob.unterwurzacher@...obroma-systems.com>
Cc:     Martin Elshuber <martin.elshuber@...obroma-systems.com>,
        Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@...obroma-systems.com>,
        linux-can@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: rx_packets/bytes stats for error frames



Am 14.03.2018 um 10:36 schrieb Marc Kleine-Budde:
> On 03/14/2018 10:09 AM, Jakob Unterwurzacher wrote:
>> On 14.03.18 08:51, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>>>> +		memcpy(cf->data, m->msg.can_msg.data, cf->can_dlc);
>>>> +
>>>> +	/* don't count error frames as real packets */
>>>> +	if (!(canid & CAN_ERR_FLAG)) {
>>>> +		stats->rx_packets++;
>>>> +		stats->rx_bytes += cf->can_dlc;
>>>> +	}
>>> Please count them, too.
>>
>> We do count them, as errors!
>>
>> This is what happens when you transmit a single CAN frame with nothing
>> connected: "TX errors" shoots up but "RX packets" stays zero.
> 
> This is handled not consistent in the existing CAN drivers. In flexcan
> all and c_can (all but rx overflow) are counted as rx_packets and
> rx_bytes. (I haven't looked at the other drivers.)
> 
> I tend to count the error frames as ordinary frames.

+1, I think we should count the packets and bytes delivered to the 
network layer.

Wolfgang.