[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 05 May 2009 14:35:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com
Cc: hawk@...u.dk, hawk@...x.dk, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com,
bruce.w.allan@...el.com, peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com,
john.ronciak@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] igb: Record hardware RX overruns in net_stats
From: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 14:32:04 -0700
> the manual[1] for the hardware says:
> RNBC:
> This register counts the number of times that frames were received
> when there were no available buffers in host memory to store those
> frames (receive descriptor head and tail pointers were equal). The
> packet is still received if there is space in the FIFO. This register
> only increments if receives are enabled. This register does not
> increment when flow control packets are received.
>
> The critical bit "The packet is still received if there is space in
> the FIFO" (AND a host memory buffer becomes available) So the reason
> we don't want to put it in the net_stats stats for drops is that the
> packet
> *wasn't* necessarily dropped.
>
> The rx_missed errors is for packets that were definitely dropped, and
> is already stored in the net_stats structure.
While not an "rx_missed" because we do eventually take the
packet, conceptually it is a "fifo overflow" in the sense
that we exceeded available receive resources at the time that
the packet arrived.
--
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