netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 5/6] sfc: ef10: implement ethtool::get_fec

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <a605fafb-a685-978c-8188-45eae96cfa04@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Apr 2021 13:39:21 +0100
From:   Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, davem@...emloft.net
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, michael.chan@...adcom.com,
        saeedm@...dia.com, leon@...nel.org, habetsm.xilinx@...il.com,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, andrew@...n.ch, mkubecek@...e.cz,
        ariela@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 5/6] sfc: ef10: implement ethtool::get_fec_stats

On 14/04/2021 04:44, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> Report what appears to be the standard block counts:
>  - 30.5.1.1.17 aFECCorrectedBlocks
>  - 30.5.1.1.18 aFECUncorrectableBlocks
> 
> Don't report the per-lane symbol counts, if those really
> count symbols they are not what the standard calls for
> (even if symbols seem like the most useful thing to count.)
> 
> Fingers crossed that fec_corrected_errors is not in symbols.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>

I'm trying to find out whether these count the right thing or not.
Some component documentation says that the per-lane _signal_ "asserts at
 maximum once per FEC coding block".  I haven't yet been able to track
 down how the counters aggregate that, but it would seem to suggest that
 they in fact count blocks and not symbols, and are just misnamed.
Investigation continues.

-ed