From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vinicius Costa Gomes Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2020 14:29:54 -0800 Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v1 8/9] igc: Add support for exposing frame preemption stats registers In-Reply-To: <20201205095948.5e0eba28@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.DHCP.thefacebook.com> References: <20201202045325.3254757-1-vinicius.gomes@intel.com> <20201202045325.3254757-9-vinicius.gomes@intel.com> <20201205095948.5e0eba28@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.DHCP.thefacebook.com> Message-ID: <87v9ddz1ul.fsf@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org List-ID: Jakub Kicinski writes: > On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 20:53:24 -0800 Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote: >> Expose the Frame Preemption counters, so the number of >> express/preemptible packets can be monitored by userspace. >> >> These registers are cleared when read, so the value shown is the >> number of events that happened since the last read. >> >> Signed-off-by: Vinicius Costa Gomes > > You mean expose in a register dump? That's not great user experience.. I can agree with that, even after some formatting on the ethtool side: Preemption statistics: TX Preemption event counter: 14070 Good TX Preemptable Packets: 201957 Good TX Express Packets: 32031 TX Preempted Packets: 13259 RX Preemption event counter: 0 Good RX Preemptable Packets: 0 Good RX Preempted Packets: 0 Preemption Exception Counter: OOO_SMDC 0 OOO_FRAME 0 OOO_FRAG 0 MISS_FRAME_FRAG 0 It's less than ideal, but useful for development/debugging. > > Are there any stats that the standards mandate? I just took abother look at the standard, mainly at the MIBs, there are no statistics related to frame preemption that I could find, only configuration stuff. > > It'd be great if we could come up with some common set and expose them > via ethtool like the pause frame statistics. Agreed, will drop this patch, until this common set is agreed upon. Cheers, -- Vinicius From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E65C4C4361B for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 22:30:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF73D23998 for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 22:30:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727743AbgLGWag (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2020 17:30:36 -0500 Received: from mga07.intel.com ([134.134.136.100]:1328 "EHLO mga07.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726346AbgLGWaf (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2020 17:30:35 -0500 IronPort-SDR: i+JevJtq4hKmTPIXkXXozccr8NzDA6QBIPu3b1zDxYWSNiDwRF6lS6goKK3Ut9wHXBSZcKN+wk jrshwAS1CCWw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9828"; a="237895444" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,400,1599548400"; d="scan'208";a="237895444" Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Dec 2020 14:29:54 -0800 IronPort-SDR: L5Soz7wYDp4oNjcX/ydMMdKhCQ3nVA9Iu1Jng82x3Nai/m8JqiOz3rY33gTMqP3XXINPyWX3Y0 Z73XTmSEGEvg== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,400,1599548400"; d="scan'208";a="363343787" Received: from seherahx-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO ellie) ([10.209.17.196]) by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Dec 2020 14:29:54 -0800 From: Vinicius Costa Gomes To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, jhs@mojatatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com, jiri@resnulli.us, m-karicheri2@ti.com, vladimir.oltean@nxp.com, Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com, po.liu@nxp.com, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 8/9] igc: Add support for exposing frame preemption stats registers In-Reply-To: <20201205095948.5e0eba28@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.DHCP.thefacebook.com> References: <20201202045325.3254757-1-vinicius.gomes@intel.com> <20201202045325.3254757-9-vinicius.gomes@intel.com> <20201205095948.5e0eba28@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.DHCP.thefacebook.com> Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2020 14:29:54 -0800 Message-ID: <87v9ddz1ul.fsf@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Jakub Kicinski writes: > On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 20:53:24 -0800 Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote: >> Expose the Frame Preemption counters, so the number of >> express/preemptible packets can be monitored by userspace. >> >> These registers are cleared when read, so the value shown is the >> number of events that happened since the last read. >> >> Signed-off-by: Vinicius Costa Gomes > > You mean expose in a register dump? That's not great user experience.. I can agree with that, even after some formatting on the ethtool side: Preemption statistics: TX Preemption event counter: 14070 Good TX Preemptable Packets: 201957 Good TX Express Packets: 32031 TX Preempted Packets: 13259 RX Preemption event counter: 0 Good RX Preemptable Packets: 0 Good RX Preempted Packets: 0 Preemption Exception Counter: OOO_SMDC 0 OOO_FRAME 0 OOO_FRAG 0 MISS_FRAME_FRAG 0 It's less than ideal, but useful for development/debugging. > > Are there any stats that the standards mandate? I just took abother look at the standard, mainly at the MIBs, there are no statistics related to frame preemption that I could find, only configuration stuff. > > It'd be great if we could come up with some common set and expose them > via ethtool like the pause frame statistics. Agreed, will drop this patch, until this common set is agreed upon. Cheers, -- Vinicius