netdev - Re: [net-next 03/14] net/mlx5e: Expose rx_oversize_pkts

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 19 Jul 2022 15:32:20 +0200
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:     Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next 03/14] net/mlx5e: Expose rx_oversize_pkts_buffer
 counter

Hello,

On Tue, 2022-07-19 at 14:13 +0300, Gal Pressman wrote:
> On 19/07/2022 06:25, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 14:33:41 -0700 Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> > > From: Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>
> > > 
> > > Add the rx_oversize_pkts_buffer counter to ethtool statistics.
> > > This counter exposes the number of dropped received packets due to
> > > length which arrived to RQ and exceed software buffer size allocated by
> > > the device for incoming traffic. It might imply that the device MTU is
> > > larger than the software buffers size.
> > Is it counted towards any of the existing stats as well? It needs 
> > to end up in struct rtnl_link_stats64::rx_length_errors somehow.
> 
> Probably makes sense to count it in rx_over_errors:
>  *   The recommended interpretation for high speed interfaces is -
>  *   number of packets dropped because they did not fit into buffers
>  *   provided by the host, e.g. packets larger than MTU or next buffer
>  *   in the ring was not available for a scatter transfer.
> 
> It doesn't fit the rx_length_errors (802.3) as these packets are not
> dropped on the MAC.
> Will change.

I read the above as you are going to send a new revision of this PR, so
I'm setting this to 'Changes Requested' in PW.

Please correct me otherwise.

Paolo