[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210826121821.2c926745@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 12:18:21 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, olteanv@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 2/3] bnxt: count packets discarded because
of netpoll
On Thu, 26 Aug 2021 11:43:58 -0700 Michael Chan wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 6:12 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> > @@ -10646,11 +10653,15 @@ static void bnxt_get_ring_stats(struct bnxt *bp,
> > stats->multicast += BNXT_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, rx_mcast_pkts);
> >
> > stats->tx_dropped += BNXT_GET_RING_STATS64(sw, tx_error_pkts);
> > +
> > + bsw_stats->rx.rx_netpoll_discards +=
> > + cpr->sw_stats.rx.rx_netpoll_discards;
>
> Can we just add these rx_netpoll_discards counters directly to
> stats->rx_dropped? It looks simpler if we do it that way, right?
To make sure - are you saying that instead of adding
struct bnxt_sw_stats sw_stats_prev;
we should accumulate in net_stats_prev->rx_dropped, and have
the ethtool counter only report the discards since last down/up?
Or to use the atomic counter on the netdev and never report
in ethtool (since after patch 3 rx_dropped is a mix of reasons)?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists