From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
Cc: Matthias Saou
<thias@spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.egg.and.spam.freshrpms.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Wrong network usage reported by /proc
Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 07:50:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090505055032.GA29582@1wt.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49FFCD08.7050600@cosmosbay.com>
On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 07:22:16AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Willy Tarreau a écrit :
> > On Mon, May 04, 2009 at 09:11:51PM +0200, Matthias Saou wrote:
> >> Eric Dumazet wrote :
> >>
> >>> Matthias Saou a écrit :
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm posting here as a last resort. I've got lots of heavily used RHEL5
> >>>> servers (2.6.18 based) that are reporting all sorts of impossible
> >>>> network usage values through /proc, leading to unrealistic snmp/cacti
> >>>> graphs where the outgoing bandwidth used it higher than the physical
> >>>> interface's maximum speed.
> >>>>
> >>>> For some details and a test script which compares values from /proc
> >>>> with values from tcpdump :
> >>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489541
> >>>>
> >>>> The values collected using tcpdump always seem realistic and match the
> >>>> values seen on the remote network equipments. So my obvious conclusion
> >>>> (but possibly wrong given my limited knowledge) is that something is
> >>>> wrong in the kernel, since it's the one exposing the /proc interface.
> >>>>
> >>>> I've reproduced what seems to be the same problem on recent kernels,
> >>>> including the 2.6.27.21-170.2.56.fc10.x86_64 I'm running right now. The
> >>>> simple python script available here allows to see it quite easily :
> >>>> https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhelv5-list/2009-February/msg00166.html
> >>>>
> >>>> * I run the script on my Workstation, I have an FTP server enabled
> >>>> * I download a DVD ISO from a remote workstation : The values match
> >>>> * I start ping floods from remote workstations : The values reported
> >>>> by /proc are much higher than the ones reported by tcpdump. I used
> >>>> "ping -s 500 -f myworkstation" from two remote workstations
> >>>>
> >>>> If there's anything flawed in my debugging, I'd love to have someone
> >>>> point it out to me. TIA to anyone willing to have a look.
> >>>>
> >>>> Matthias
> >>>>
> >>> I could not reproduce this here... what kind of NIC are you using on
> >>> affected systems ? Some ethernet drivers report stats from card itself,
> >>> and I remember seeing some strange stats on some hardware, but I cannot
> >>> remember which one it was (we were reading NULL values instead of
> >>> real ones, once in a while, maybe it was a firmware issue...)
> >> My workstation has a Broadcom BCM5752 (tg3 module). The servers which
> >> are most affected have Intel 82571EB (e1000e). But the issue is that
> >> with /proc, the values are a lot _higher_ than with tcpdump, and the
> >> tcpdump values seem to be the correct ones.
> >
> > the e1000 chip reports stats every 2 seconds. So you have to collect
> > stats every 2 seconds otherwise you get "camel-looking" stats.
> >
>
> I looked at e1000e driver, and apparently tx_packets & tx_bytes are computed
> by the TX completion routine, not by the chip.
Ah I thought that was the chip which returned those stats every 2 seconds,
otherwise I don't see the reason to delay their reporting. Wait, I'm speaking
about e1000, never tried e1000e. Maybe there have been changes there. Anyway,
Matthias talked about RHEL5's 2.6.18 in which I don't think there was e1000e.
Anyway we did not get any concrete data for now, so it's hard to tell (I
haven't copy-pasted the links above in my browser yet).
Regards,
Willy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-05 5:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-04 15:14 Wrong network usage reported by /proc Matthias Saou
2009-05-04 17:53 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-05-04 19:11 ` Matthias Saou
2009-05-05 5:04 ` Willy Tarreau
2009-05-05 5:22 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-05-05 5:50 ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
2009-05-05 8:09 ` Matthias Saou
2009-05-05 8:51 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-05-07 17:58 ` Matthias Saou
2009-05-05 4:46 ` Robert Hancock
2009-05-05 8:02 ` Matthias Saou
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090505055032.GA29582@1wt.eu \
--to=w@1wt.eu \
--cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=thias@spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.spam.egg.and.spam.freshrpms.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.