From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Milan Kocian Subject: Re: Difference between device statistics from ifconfig and ip -s l l Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:29:20 +0200 Message-ID: <20071017112919.GC16356@wq.cz> References: <20071017092659.GA16356@wq.cz> <4715D79E.7020201@trash.net> <20071017101303.GB16356@wq.cz> <4715E57F.6080905@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Patrick McHardy Return-path: Received: from gw-sitel.lam.cz ([212.71.129.172]:52357 "EHLO nt.wq.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758466AbXJQL3Z (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Oct 2007 07:29:25 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4715E57F.6080905@trash.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 12:35:43PM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote: > Milan Kocian wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 11:36:30AM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote: >> >>> ifconfig gets its data from /proc/net/dev, which adds up rx_errors >>> and rx_missed. >>> >> Adds up rx_errors and rx_missed and prints it as dropped ? Ok, ifconfig is >> a little old. But why I don't see missed packets from RX errors detailed >> stats (ip -s -s l l) in non-detailed stats as errors and see zero ? > > > I meant to write "adds up rx_dropped and rx_missed". ok. One probably stupid question: Why is not done similar sum in output of 'ip -s l l' ? Imagine me :), I do 'ifconfig' and see dropped packets and then I do 'ip -s l l' and see zeros. I stare on it like an idiot. Where is bug ? ifconfig ? ip ? (man page of ip and 'ip -s -s l l' with missed packets stats saved me :). IMHO I think that comparable outputs of both programs should be still the same. thanks for reply. regards, -- Milan Kocian