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]

Message-ID: <20220719202234.sym2tqtsko5iond2@sx1>
Date:   Tue, 19 Jul 2022 13:22:34 -0700
From:   Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>
To:     Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        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

On 19 Jul 14:13, 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.

it is already counted in ethtool->rx_wqe_err, but rx wqe err is more
general purpose and can include other errors too, the idea is to have a
better resolution for the error reason. 

>
>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 will drop this patch until we have a decision. but i tend to agree with
Gal.