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  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:   Sun, 13 Sep 2020 12:14:14 +0300
From:   Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
        Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>, tariqt@...dia.com,
        saeedm@...dia.com, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 7/8] ixgbe: add pause frame stats

On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 03:13:43PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 14:12:50 -0700 Alexander Duyck wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 12:53 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > @@ -3546,6 +3556,7 @@ static const struct ethtool_ops ixgbe_ethtool_ops = {
> > >         .set_eeprom             = ixgbe_set_eeprom,
> > >         .get_ringparam          = ixgbe_get_ringparam,
> > >         .set_ringparam          = ixgbe_set_ringparam,
> > > +       .get_pause_stats        = ixgbe_get_pause_stats,
> > >         .get_pauseparam         = ixgbe_get_pauseparam,
> > >         .set_pauseparam         = ixgbe_set_pauseparam,
> > >         .get_msglevel           = ixgbe_get_msglevel,  
> > 
> > So the count for this is simpler in igb than it is for ixgbe. I'm
> > assuming you want just standard link flow control frames. If so then
> > this patch is correct. Otherwise if you are wanting to capture
> > priority flow control data then those are a seperate array of stats
> > prefixed with a "p" instead of an "l". Otherwise this looks fine to
> > me.
> 
> That's my interpretation, although I haven't found any place the
> standard would address this directly. Non-PFC pause has a different
> opcode, so I'm reasonably certain this makes sense.
> 
> BTW I'm not entirely clear on what "global PFC pause" is either.
> 
> Maybe someone can clarify? Mellanox folks?

I checked IEEE 802.1Qaz and could not find anything relevant. My only
guess is that it might be a PFC frame with all the priorities set.

Where did you see it?

> 
> > Reviewed-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> Thanks!
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists