[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] net/i40e: fix Rx statistic inconsistent

Zhao1, Wei wei.zhao1 at intel.com
Tue Aug 9 04:18:10 CEST 2016


Hi ,Kyle Larose&Jingjing

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kyle Larose [mailto:eomereadig at gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2016 12:22 AM
> To: Zhao1, Wei <wei.zhao1 at intel.com>
> Cc: Wu, Jingjing <jingjing.wu at intel.com>; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] net/i40e: fix Rx statistic inconsistent
> 
> Hello Wei,
> 
> 
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 2:59 AM, Zhao1, Wei <wei.zhao1 at intel.com> wrote:
> > Hi, Wujingjing and Kyle Larose
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Zhao1, Wei
> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2016 11:27 AM
> >> To: Wu, Jingjing <jingjing.wu at intel.com>; Lu, Wenzhuo
> >> <wenzhuo.lu at intel.com>
> >> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> >> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] net/i40e: fix Rx statistic
> >> inconsistent
> >>
> >> Hi,Wu jingjing and wenzhuo
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Zhao1, Wei
> >> > Sent: Monday, August 1, 2016 4:58 PM
> >> > To: 'Kyle Larose' <eomereadig at gmail.com>
> >> > Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> >> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] net/i40e: fix Rx statistic
> >> > inconsistent
> >> >
> >> > Hi, Kyle Larose
> >> >    The core problem is i40e has no statistic of discard bytes, that
> >> > means even if when ports are not stopped, the statistic
> >> > rx_good_bytes is consist of discard
> >> > bytes,is that reasonable? In other words, I can just minus discard
> >> > bytes from rx_good_bytes if I can get discard bytes number, that is
> >> > much
> >> better.
> >> >
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Kyle Larose [mailto:eomereadig at gmail.com]
> >> > Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2016 1:17 AM
> >> > To: Zhao1, Wei <wei.zhao1 at intel.com>
> >> > Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> >> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] net/i40e: fix Rx statistic
> >> > inconsistent
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 4:50 AM, Wei Zhao1 <wei.zhao1 at intel.com>
> wrote:
> >> > > rx_good_bytes and rx_good_packets statistic is inconsistent when
> >> > > port stopped,ipackets statistic is minus the discard packets but
> >> > > rx_bytes statistic not.Also,i40e has no statistic of discard
> >> > > bytes, so we have to delete discard packets item from
> rx_good_packets statistic.
> >> > >
> >> > > Fixes: 9aace75fc82e ("i40e: fix statistics")
> >> > >
> >> > > Signed-off-by: Wei Zhao1 <wei.zhao1 at intel.com>
> >> > > ---
> >> > >  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c | 3 +--
> >> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >> > >
> >> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c
> >> > > b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c index 11a5804..553dfd9 100644
> >> > > --- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c
> >> > > +++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c
> >> > > @@ -2319,8 +2319,7 @@ i40e_dev_stats_get(struct rte_eth_dev
> *dev,
> >> > > struct rte_eth_stats *stats)
> >> > >
> >> > >         stats->ipackets = pf->main_vsi->eth_stats.rx_unicast +
> >> > >                         pf->main_vsi->eth_stats.rx_multicast +
> >> > > -                       pf->main_vsi->eth_stats.rx_broadcast -
> >> > > -                       pf->main_vsi->eth_stats.rx_discards;
> >> > > +                       pf->main_vsi->eth_stats.rx_broadcast;
> >> > >         stats->opackets = pf->main_vsi->eth_stats.tx_unicast +
> >> > >                         pf->main_vsi->eth_stats.tx_multicast +
> >> > >                         pf->main_vsi->eth_stats.tx_broadcast;
> >> > > --
> >> > > 2.5.5
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Is it not worse to report a received packet when no packet was
> >> > actually received by the upper layers under normal operations than
> >> > to ensure that packets and  bytes are consistent when an interface
> >> > is stopped? It seems like the first case is much more likely to
> >> > occur than the
> >> second.
> >> >
> >> > Are we just introducing a new issue to fix another?
> >> >
> >> > How does this behaviour compare to other NICs? Does the ixgbe
> >> > report discarded packets in its ipackets? My reading of the driver is that
> it does not.
> >> > In fact, it does something interesting to deal with the
> >> > problem:
> >> >
> >> > from:
> >> > http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk/tree/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.c
> >> >
> >> > /*
> >> > * An errata states that gprc actually counts good + missed packets:
> >> > * Workaround to set gprc to summated queue packet receives */
> >> > hw_stats-
> >> > >gprc = *total_qprc;
> >> >
> >> > total_gprc is equal to the sum of the qprc per queue. Can we do
> >> > something similar on the i40e instead of adding unicast, mulitcast
> >> > and
> >> broadcast?
> >>
> >>
> >> I have checked ixgbe code about  Rx statistic, in function
> >> ixgbe_read_stats_registers() we can find the rx_good_bytes and
> >> rx_good_packets statistic.
> >> It is listed below, we  can see rx_good_packets is also just addition
> >> of Queue Packets Received Count and  not minused  discard packet
> number.
> >> Is there some wrong of understanding?
> 
> 
> 
> My understanding of the problem can be broken into three parts:
>  1) In Unicast/Multicast/Broadcast packet counters are counting packets
> which were discarded
>  2) The corresponding byte counters count packets which were discarded.
>  3) There are no discarded byte counters.
> 
> Our in bytes counter consists of the sum of in unicast, in multicast, and in
> broadcast. This sum includes discarded bytes, which we do not want, for two
> reasons. First, it would lead to misleading bitrate
> reports: people expect to see the amount of traffic actually handled.
> Second, it conflicts with the current packet counters (the counters without
> your change).
> 
> Obviously if we could count the discarded bytes, we could subtract them.
> Alternatively, if we could count only received bytes which were not
> discarded, then we would not need to subtract discarded bytes from the
> received bytes counter. The ixgbe had a similar problem for packets, but
> presumably not bytes. So, I looked to it for inspiration.
> 
> Presumably, the ixgbe per-queue counters count all received packets, per
> queue, and do not count discarded packets.Thus, is you take the sum of
> received packets across all queues, you can find the total number of received
> packets without discards included.
> 
> Can we not do the same thing on the i40e, but for bytes? I just took a quick
> look at the datasheet, and I cannot see anything offhand that is equivalent to
> qbrc, which is what I would have used here. That said, I'm not an i40e expert,
> so I may have missed something. That's why I'm asking if it's possible. :)
> 
> 
> 
> >>
> >> for (i = 0; i < IXGBE_QUEUE_STAT_COUNTERS; i++) { ......
> >>                                  *total_qprc += hw_stats->qprc[i];
> >>               *total_qbrc += hw_stats->qbrc[i]; ......
> >> }
> >
> >    The problem is i40e has no statistic of discard bytes, so it is
> > impossible to minus discard bytes from rx_good_bytes . If you think it's not
> reasonable to Delete  rx_discards iterm from rx_good_packets statistic, this
> patch will be superseded. Because I didn't find other way to correct this
> problem at present.
> >
> 
> I understand that there is no discard byte counter. Are there per-queue byte
> counters on the i40e, which do not count discarded byte, with which we
> could do a similar thing as the packet counters on the ixgbe?
> 
> My concern is that both solutions aside from that are not good: either we
> count less packets received than bytes received, or we count discarded
> packets as received packets. Is there any chance that a firmware update in
> the future could fix this? This sort of inconsistency, or inability to provide
> *good* stats, really sucks for a NIC.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Kyle


According to your suggestion and meeting last week with harry ,I have supply a v3 patch for this problem.
[dpdk-dev,v3] net/i40e: fix Rx statistic inconsistent  , Permalink :/dev/patchwork/patch/15161/.
This fix is avoiding  statistic work when port is stopped.



More information about the dev mailing list