From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F35AA04C8; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 11:24:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37A271D95C; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 11:24:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-wr1-f66.google.com (mail-wr1-f66.google.com [209.85.221.66]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 638661D95B for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 11:24:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wr1-f66.google.com with SMTP id a17so4870046wrn.6 for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 02:24:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nfware-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=SctOg3xO+pIN7qUL87MWI/QV66M+F5w1+KgwLPGwGww=; b=WcNBWb1E8Ms9uo3UsI6wvPpScdFQN6VXgaSofCezJcPhc4EhcaRbQkfZuvGU1OuXMm 4D5ByOzX90GrK1o1qqlSczO3JnLW6akMEABjjp3eIoTVRKLaEcf6gGFhFWqHj045oB2I KLcgRdrSvUIZIvD6d7Ru0jcQnvsOIa+DAPrtlHpXIglCDEzNzHTqsfuoswOvYbfGw0at VDnrEpN3LWaPzlspcskIKDSijEPtG/07DD80Ey127tSEL5vD6Cp1Vu7GsK8zjax9iQLR d4ShKLvHyb7h73Q1uDnmV4UMM8SJkKHPwQ5Gw0zzocdZ1RdnBNdaxfmkF0To6hRNzOG1 rINQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=SctOg3xO+pIN7qUL87MWI/QV66M+F5w1+KgwLPGwGww=; b=D7w/1ZVRkgv7MS/TNMCqspLiHhnzPbhEGuaioSgoyEJWTwdN5Xr4+52RDVIaqt1KHU SrN7x5mQ0wY2LtWy9BYGgV1iGwFOTzVDZj6KVEv7dykBoBmWw79wZuxTxO4dzqP0k/vV xN9GJCx05saYYuVWukYPwrbAz6Z6/3axatM9Y30glRkWzE12hMQa8tnoT8PTyAcZDq3W ApnJw9q6Hdj38UrM4heUpyGkTyBtzt2QBBWu4zFYu3xjcVLTZ8oN0bBoj93IhAyqrAgK WroxJ6Z745YfNmw06ahDBgbNNj1EFaGmrzr7UbquFh42Rj8bklDuXYF8qB/mLMspQRmf md1Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530h8soOzVk960cVdC4lAr5TaEW2L1DNBQPpAowXiIfrE2ccpfPu jN/7wO/PFLdbwcOdbzkB3l+eZ8dJPUEu/4bf7+eg7w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyzsp08tabIlpQq7DpB6ylAFMT8SmOiiFdkmQtwbXothzwaxdPTKgAQ0LRMu0gDF3Wcu9awHIzf5sk9bwUZSnQ= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6784:: with SMTP id v4mr14692345wru.132.1600421047902; Fri, 18 Sep 2020 02:24:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200910015426.3140-1-junyux.jiang@intel.com> <20200916015105.39815-1-junyux.jiang@intel.com> <295e61ad-cbc5-3fbe-c996-c3f9a11b34d6@intel.com> In-Reply-To: From: Igor Ryzhov Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2020 12:23:57 +0300 Message-ID: To: "Jiang, JunyuX" Cc: "Yigit, Ferruh" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Guo, Jia" , "Xing, Beilei" , "stable@dpdk.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2] net/i40e: fix incorrect byte counters X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hi, Your code will work only if stats are updated at least once between two overflows. So it's still up to the application to handle this properly. I think it should be mentioned in the docs. Igor On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 6:45 AM Jiang, JunyuX wrote: > Hi Ferruh, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ferruh Yigit > > Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2020 8:31 PM > > To: Jiang, JunyuX ; dev@dpdk.org > > Cc: Guo, Jia ; Xing, Beilei ; > > stable@dpdk.org > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v2] net/i40e: fix incorrect byte > counters > > > > On 9/16/2020 2:51 AM, Junyu Jiang wrote: > > > This patch fixed the issue that rx/tx bytes overflowed > > > > "Rx/Tx statistics counters overflowed"? > > > Yes, the rx_bytes and tx_bytes counter in X710 cards is 48-bit long, if > keep sending packets for a log time, the register will overflow. > > > > on 48 bit limitation by enlarging the limitation. > > > > > > Fixes: 4861cde46116 ("i40e: new poll mode driver") > > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Junyu Jiang > > > --- > > > drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c | 47 > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.h | 9 +++++++ > > > 2 files changed, 56 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c > > > b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c index 563f21d9d..4d4ea9861 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c > > > +++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c > > > @@ -3073,6 +3073,13 @@ i40e_update_vsi_stats(struct i40e_vsi *vsi) > > > i40e_stat_update_48(hw, I40E_GLV_BPRCH(idx), > > I40E_GLV_BPRCL(idx), > > > vsi->offset_loaded, &oes->rx_broadcast, > > > &nes->rx_broadcast); > > > + /* enlarge the limitation when rx_bytes overflowed */ > > > + if (vsi->offset_loaded) { > > > + if (I40E_RXTX_BYTES_LOW(vsi->old_rx_bytes) > nes- > > >rx_bytes) > > > + nes->rx_bytes += (uint64_t)1 << I40E_48_BIT_WIDTH; > > > + nes->rx_bytes += I40E_RXTX_BYTES_HIGH(vsi- > > >old_rx_bytes); > > > + } > > > + vsi->old_rx_bytes = nes->rx_bytes; > > > > > > Can you please describe this logic? (indeed better to describe it in the > > commit log) > > > > 'nes->rx_bytes' is diff in the stats register since last read. > > 'old_rx_bytes' is the previous stats diff. > > > > Why/how "I40E_RXTX_BYTES_LOW(vsi->old_rx_bytes) > nes->rx_bytes" has > > a meaning? Isn't this very depends on the read frequency? > > > > I guess I am missing something but please help me understand. > > > This patch fixes the issue of rx/tx bytes counter register overflow: > The counter register in i40e is 48-bit long, when overflow, nes->rx_bytes > becomes less than old_rx_bytes, the correct value of nes->rx_bytes should > be plused 1 << 48. > Use I40E_RXTX_BYTES_HIGH() to remember the MSB, nes->rx_bytes plus the MSB > is the correct value, So that using uint64_t to enlarge the 48 bit > limitation of register . > > > Also can you please confirm the initial value of the > "vsi->offset_loaded" is > > correct. > > > offset_loaded will be true when get statistics of port and offset_loaded > will be false when reset or clear the statistics, > so if offset_loaded is false, shouldn't to calculate the value of > nes->rx_bytes, it will be 0. > > > <....> > > > > > @@ -282,6 +282,9 @@ struct rte_flow { > > > #define I40E_ETH_OVERHEAD \ > > > (RTE_ETHER_HDR_LEN + RTE_ETHER_CRC_LEN + > > I40E_VLAN_TAG_SIZE * 2) > > > > > > +#define I40E_RXTX_BYTES_HIGH(bytes) ((bytes) & ~I40E_48_BIT_MASK) > > > +#define I40E_RXTX_BYTES_LOW(bytes) ((bytes) & I40E_48_BIT_MASK) > > > + > > > > HIGH/LOW is a little misleading, for 64Bits it sounds like it is getting > low 32 bits > > and high 32 bits, can you please clarify macro masks out > > 48/16 bits. > > > Yes, I will change the macro name in V3. > > > > > struct i40e_adapter; > > > struct rte_pci_driver; > > > > > > @@ -399,6 +402,8 @@ struct i40e_vsi { > > > uint8_t vlan_anti_spoof_on; /* The VLAN anti-spoofing enabled */ > > > uint8_t vlan_filter_on; /* The VLAN filter enabled */ > > > struct i40e_bw_info bw_info; /* VSI bandwidth information */ > > > + uint64_t old_rx_bytes; > > > + uint64_t old_tx_bytes; > > > > 'prev' seems better naming than 'old', what do you think renaming > > 'old_rx_bytes' -> 'prev_rx_bytes' (for all variables)? > Yes, it's better, I will fix it in V3. >