* Re: Re: drop counts [not found] ` <Pine.WNT.4.63.0507201505370.1936@jbrandeb-desk.amr.corp.intel.com> @ 2005-07-21 13:36 ` P 2005-07-25 17:47 ` Jesse Brandeburg 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: P @ 2005-07-21 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: jesse.brandeburg; +Cc: netdev, e1000-devel [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1664 bytes --] Jesse Brandeburg wrote: > > dropped: rnbc does not mean dropped, see above. mpc means dropped. > > fifo: mpc means the fifo overflowed, and the packet was dropped (the > only time we drop). > > missed: this should also be mpc because it shows we missed the packet. Wow, thanks! So there we were reporting drops prior to 2.6.12 when there possibly were none! I've confirmed with a traffic generator here that rnbc does not include packets actually dropped. It's interesting that at about 1Mpps sustained for 10s, mpc was 548,888, while rnbc was 4,331,730 suggesting that the nic was trying to DMA to the buffer at a higher rate than the packet receive rate. Anway recapping... 2.6.11 stats were mapped like: packets = gprc dropped = rnbc fifo = mpc missed = mpc In 2.6.12 this changed to: packets = gprc dropped = mpc fifo = mpc missed = mpc > now, its debatable if we should be reporting the same stat 3 times, but > i still think it is correct, and its how our hardware maps stats and the > best we can overlay onto linux's definitions as we interpret them. I think there still is a problem. Notice that /proc/net/dev reports rx_dropped + rx_missed_errors for the drop column, and so will be double counting drops currently. Therefore I think we should be doing: packets = gprc dropped = 0 fifo = rnbc missed = mpc I'm putting rnbc in fifo as it's not accumulated into anything else in the kernel. Also it's good to have it reported as one can see when there is pressure on the e1000 driver buffer. This is useful for tuning its size to protect against drops and latency. thanks, Pádraig. [-- Attachment #2: e1000-drops.diff --] [-- Type: application/x-texinfo, Size: 701 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: drop counts 2005-07-21 13:36 ` Re: drop counts P @ 2005-07-25 17:47 ` Jesse Brandeburg 2005-07-26 8:36 ` P 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Jesse Brandeburg @ 2005-07-25 17:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: P; +Cc: netdev, e1000-devel On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, P@draigBrady.com wrote: > > dropped: rnbc does not mean dropped, see above. mpc means dropped. > > > > fifo: mpc means the fifo overflowed, and the packet was dropped (the > > only time we drop). > > > > missed: this should also be mpc because it shows we missed the packet. > > Wow, thanks! So there we were reporting drops prior > to 2.6.12 when there possibly were none! yeah, that was kind of ugly. > It's interesting that at about 1Mpps sustained for 10s, > mpc was 548,888, while rnbc was 4,331,730 suggesting > that the nic was trying to DMA to the buffer at a > higher rate than the packet receive rate. Not really that interesting because the NIC may have been trying multiple times internally to DMA the data (possibly as each packet was received) and failing each time. > 2.6.11 stats were mapped like: > > packets = gprc > dropped = rnbc > fifo = mpc > missed = mpc > > In 2.6.12 this changed to: > > packets = gprc > dropped = mpc > fifo = mpc > missed = mpc > > > now, its debatable if we should be reporting the same stat 3 times, but > > i still think it is correct, and its how our hardware maps stats and the > > best we can overlay onto linux's definitions as we interpret them. > > I think there still is a problem. Notice that /proc/net/dev > reports rx_dropped + rx_missed_errors for the drop column, > and so will be double counting drops currently. > Therefore I think we should be doing: > > packets = gprc > dropped = 0 > fifo = rnbc > missed = mpc Double counting drops may be an issue, and I believe we should make that change. but I don't think its the right thing to report rnbc in fifo errors (there was actually no error). > I'm putting rnbc in fifo as it's not accumulated into > anything else in the kernel. Also it's good to have > it reported as one can see when there is pressure on > the e1000 driver buffer. This is useful for tuning its size > to protect against drops and latency. Whenever I want the RNBC numbers I simply look into ethtool -S eth0, and that allows me to tune. I see no reason to "reuse" the fifo errors stat with misleading data. Once again, having clear guidelines on what these stats actually mean for drivers and when they should use them for ethernet would be *really* useful. Jesse ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: drop counts 2005-07-25 17:47 ` Jesse Brandeburg @ 2005-07-26 8:36 ` P 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: P @ 2005-07-26 8:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jesse Brandeburg; +Cc: netdev, e1000-devel Jesse Brandeburg wrote: > On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, P@draigBrady.com wrote: > >> In 2.6.12 this changed to: >> >> packets = gprc >> dropped = mpc >> fifo = mpc >> missed = mpc >> >> I think there still is a problem. Notice that /proc/net/dev >> reports rx_dropped + rx_missed_errors for the drop column, >> and so will be double counting drops currently. >> Therefore I think we should be doing: >> >> packets = gprc >> dropped = 0 >> fifo = rnbc >> missed = mpc > > > Double counting drops may be an issue, and I believe we should make that > change. great. > but I don't think its the right thing to report rnbc in fifo > errors (there was actually no error). > >> I'm putting rnbc in fifo as it's not accumulated into >> anything else in the kernel. Also it's good to have >> it reported as one can see when there is pressure on >> the e1000 driver buffer. This is useful for tuning its size >> to protect against drops and latency. > > > Whenever I want the RNBC numbers I simply look into ethtool -S eth0, and > that allows me to tune. I see no reason to "reuse" the fifo errors stat > with misleading data. Fair enough if rnbc is actually reported. ethtool -S doesn't report it with my driver, but I see this stat has been added to the latest driver at least. So I agree on both points. thanks! -- Pádraig Brady - http://www.pixelbeat.org -- ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id\x16492&op=click ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* RE: Re: drop counts @ 2005-07-20 23:23 Brandeburg, Jesse 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Brandeburg, Jesse @ 2005-07-20 23:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: P; +Cc: netdev, netdev, e1000-devel I apologize for my misconfigured email client, this is my correct address PS machine rebuilds suck. -----Original Message----- From: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Jesse Brandeburg ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77&alloc_id\x16492&op=click ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-07-26 8:36 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <42DCDCAF.1060005@draigBrady.com>
[not found] ` <42DCF0F7.6000704@draigBrady.com>
[not found] ` <Pine.WNT.4.63.0507201505370.1936@jbrandeb-desk.amr.corp.intel.com>
2005-07-21 13:36 ` Re: drop counts P
2005-07-25 17:47 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2005-07-26 8:36 ` P
2005-07-20 23:23 Brandeburg, Jesse
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).