netdev - Re: [PATCH] net/mlx5e: Report rx_discards_phy via rx_missed

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: <CALOAHbDPbwH7vqV2_NAm=_YnN2KnmVLOe7avWOYG+Rynd295Vg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2024 19:49:00 +0800
From: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>
To: Tariq Toukan <ttoukan.linux@...il.com>
Cc: saeedm@...dia.com, tariqt@...dia.com, leon@...nel.org, 
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/mlx5e: Report rx_discards_phy via rx_missed_errors

On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 5:56 PM Tariq Toukan <ttoukan.linux@...il.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 06/11/2024 8:40, Yafang Shao wrote:
> > We observed a high number of rx_discards_phy events on some servers when
> > running `ethtool -S`. However, this important counter is not currently
> > reflected in the /proc/net/dev statistics file, making it challenging to
> > monitor effectively.
> >
> > Since rx_missed_errors represents packets dropped due to buffer exhaustion,
> > it makes sense to include rx_discards_phy in this counter to enhance
> > monitoring visibility. This change will help administrators track these
> > events more effectively through standard interfaces.
> >
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for your patch.
>
> It's a matter of interpretation...
> The documentation in
> Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-class-net-statistics refers to the
> driver for the exact meaning.
>
> rx_discards_phy counts packet drops due to exhaustion of the physical
> port memory (not in the host), this happen way before steering the
> packet to any receive queue.
> Today, rx_missed_errors counts SW/host memory buffer exhaustion of the
> receive queues.
> I don't think that rx_missed_errors should mix both.

Thanks for your detailed explanation.

>
> Maybe some other counter can be used for rx_discards_phy, like
> rx_fifo_errors?

It appears that rx_fifo_errors is a more appropriate counter for this purpose.
I will submit a v2. Thanks for your suggestion.

-- 
Regards
Yafang