Re: [dpdk-dev] Inconsistent statistics counters for pmd_i40e

["Eimear Morrissey" <eimear.morrissey@ie.ibm.com>]

Arnon Warshavsky <arnon@qwilt.com> wrote on 10/19/2015 03:46:22 PM:

> From: Arnon Warshavsky <arnon@qwilt.com>
> To: Eimear Morrissey/Ireland/IBM@IBMIE
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Date: 10/19/2015 03:46 PM
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Inconsistent statistics counters for pmd_i40e
>
> Hi Eimear
>
> This is the link I have.
> https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/24769
>
> I guess that the version seen in the web page comes from a different
> parallel universe.
> You should see the actual fw version inside the zip file.

> Thanks
> /Arnon
>
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Eimear Morrissey
<eimear.morrissey@ie.ibm.com
> > wrote:
> Arnon Warshavsky <arnon@qwilt.com> wrote on 10/19/2015 03:01:46 PM:
>
> > From: Arnon Warshavsky <arnon@qwilt.com>
> > To: Eimear Morrissey/Ireland/IBM@IBMIE
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> > Date: 10/19/2015 03:01 PM
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Inconsistent statistics counters for pmd_i40e
>
> >
> > Hi Eimear,
> >
> > I just experienced the same problem with firmware versions 4.23 and
> > 4.33 (dpdk 2.0). Did not get to try the latest which is 4.5.
> > Looking at the code, I don't see that this counter is being read any
> > differently than its peer counters and I suspect the nic itself.
> > Can you tell which firmware version you were using?
> >
> > thanks
> > /Arnon
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Eimear Morrissey <
> eimear.morrissey@ie.ibm.com
> > > wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm having issues measuring packets dropped at the NIC in both the
2.0.0
> > and 2.1.0 versions of DPDK on an X710 Intel NIC.
> >
> > In dpdk-2.0.0
> > Using rte_eth_xstats the rx_packets and rx_bytes counters increase as
> > expected, however rx_missed_errors is always 0 even if a sleep
statement is
> > added between calls to rte_eth_rx_burst. However changing the coremask
so
> > the application is running on a different socket than the card will
cause
> > rx_missed_errors to increment for a limited amount of time and then
stop.
> > Using rte_eth_stats, ipackets is incremented on packet receipt but the
> > q_ipackets and q_errors arrays remain zero. Even crossing sockets seems
to
> > have no effect on q_errors.
> >
> > In dpdk-2.1.0 the behaviour is the same as above, except that the
number of
> > fields returned by rte_eth_xstats_get is reduced (no rx_missed errors
at
> > all) so running on a different socket no longer has any noticeable
effect
> > on the stats.
> >
> > My understanding from the API manual is that the rte_eth_stats q_errors
> > array should count the packets missed because software isn't polling
fast
> > enough, but that doesn't seem to be the case? Is there a standard DPDK
way
> > to check this? The application is a forwarding one so there's no other
way
> > to estimate drop except through NIC rx.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Eimear
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Arnon Warshavsky
> > Qwilt | work: +972-72-2221634 | mobile: +972-50-8583058 |
arnon@qwilt.com

> Hi Arnon,
>
> The firmware version I'm using is 4.26. Where do you see the latest
> is 4.5 - I can't find anything obvious in the download centre?
>
> Regards,
> Eimear
>
>
>
> --
>
> Arnon Warshavsky
> Qwilt | work: +972-72-2221634 | mobile: +972-50-8583058 | arnon@qwilt.com


I tried installing the firmware but on running the NVM update tool I just
get "No updates available for your device" which makes me think that (for
my SKU at least) I'm on the latest firmware.

Also, if I bind the card back to the i40e driver, I can force the dropped
count in ifconfig to increase by decreasing the rx ring size so I'm not
convinced it's entirely a hardware issue.

Regards,
Eimear