Date:	Tue, 5 May 2009 07:50:32 +0200
From:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Cc:	Matthias Saou 
	<thias@...m.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.egg.and.spam.freshrpms.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Wrong network usage reported by /proc

On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 07:22:16AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Willy Tarreau a écrit :
> > On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 09:11:51PM +0200, Matthias Saou wrote:
> >> Eric Dumazet wrote :
> >>
> >>> Matthias Saou a écrit :
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm posting here as a last resort. I've got lots of heavily used RHEL5
> >>>> servers (2.6.18 based) that are reporting all sorts of impossible
> >>>> network usage values through /proc, leading to unrealistic snmp/cacti
> >>>> graphs where the outgoing bandwidth used it higher than the physical
> >>>> interface's maximum speed.
> >>>>
> >>>> For some details and a test script which compares values from /proc
> >>>> with values from tcpdump :
> >>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489541
> >>>>
> >>>> The values collected using tcpdump always seem realistic and match the
> >>>> values seen on the remote network equipments. So my obvious conclusion
> >>>> (but possibly wrong given my limited knowledge) is that something is
> >>>> wrong in the kernel, since it's the one exposing the /proc interface.
> >>>>
> >>>> I've reproduced what seems to be the same problem on recent kernels,
> >>>> including the 2.6.27.21-170.2.56.fc10.x86_64 I'm running right now. The
> >>>> simple python script available here allows to see it quite easily :
> >>>> https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhelv5-list/2009-February/msg00166.html
> >>>>
> >>>>  * I run the script on my Workstation, I have an FTP server enabled
> >>>>  * I download a DVD ISO from a remote workstation : The values match
> >>>>  * I start ping floods from remote workstations : The values reported
> >>>>    by /proc are much higher than the ones reported by tcpdump. I used
> >>>>    "ping -s 500 -f myworkstation" from two remote workstations
> >>>>
> >>>> If there's anything flawed in my debugging, I'd love to have someone
> >>>> point it out to me. TIA to anyone willing to have a look.
> >>>>
> >>>> Matthias
> >>>>
> >>> I could not reproduce this here... what kind of NIC are you using on
> >>> affected systems ? Some ethernet drivers report stats from card itself,
> >>> and I remember seeing some strange stats on some hardware, but I cannot
> >>> remember which one it was (we were reading NULL values instead of
> >>> real ones, once in a while, maybe it was a firmware issue...)
> >> My workstation has a Broadcom BCM5752 (tg3 module). The servers which
> >> are most affected have Intel 82571EB (e1000e). But the issue is that
> >> with /proc, the values are a lot _higher_ than with tcpdump, and the
> >> tcpdump values seem to be the correct ones.
> > 
> > the e1000 chip reports stats every 2 seconds. So you have to collect
> > stats every 2 seconds otherwise you get "camel-looking" stats.
> > 
> 
> I looked at e1000e driver, and apparently tx_packets & tx_bytes are computed
> by the TX completion routine, not by the chip.

Ah I thought that was the chip which returned those stats every 2 seconds,
otherwise I don't see the reason to delay their reporting. Wait, I'm speaking
about e1000, never tried e1000e. Maybe there have been changes there. Anyway,
Matthias talked about RHEL5's 2.6.18 in which I don't think there was e1000e.

Anyway we did not get any concrete data for now, so it's hard to tell (I
haven't copy-pasted the links above in my browser yet).

Regards,
Willy

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists