From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <aber@semihalf.com>
Received: from mail-la0-f49.google.com (mail-la0-f49.google.com
 [209.85.215.49]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38ECA12A8
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri,  4 Sep 2015 18:58:43 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by lagj9 with SMTP id j9so17717804lag.2
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 09:58:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from
 :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references
 :to; bh=YA9889ZlZ1/faDKYDmCI14t+/S0X6fgBxyeS1t9JxfI=;
 b=co4xPu+4NcmfS98Ji5XfPgvDreoxXI6erwyTpdfKPUfo4y7ftAAr9ftqJjje/z2p0H
 tJF8/TYpA7bf9ioIG8oT2aDEf1H/8N3RdnqiTxMZlpydYqGmtkwOHcE2+raMycj45cI8
 Jlq3Qjd/X86zldChXURtrTSWZs3LyQrsKOZiDkCH96iLM2r//jE6+5iNzVQd/4TMP/w5
 LrnKv7ISgtiP3IWsDLNKHbv6QMxwc/3pZgG7bk9CuyLhV0nhbgv7dl48cKek2ungJmgt
 m0DyPVrDtezhfdhynzWKEJOYLhiAzuO3TrOBwOneFzdE/JQieAreMKrv68EBtTeuWwUn
 b8aw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmV+s+QkO0aWIPqrYTlzTwXGGFuHkbdpYggYRCfSqZSfOixmN8T1x3bvVjKSunbU9fXnzi9
X-Received: by 10.152.9.37 with SMTP id w5mr4487269laa.43.1441385922866;
 Fri, 04 Sep 2015 09:58:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.20] ([78.10.194.120])
 by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y6sm698536lay.49.2015.09.04.09.58.41
 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
 Fri, 04 Sep 2015 09:58:41 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
From: Andriy Berestovskyy <aber@semihalf.com>
In-Reply-To: <1A27633A6DA49C4A92FCD5D4312DBF536A508A73@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 18:58:40 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <CB900CE7-0595-48F1-B521-40B1E80AF73F@semihalf.com>
References: <CAOysbxp7PxvZDtGiOS+0S_0YiMVBPoH0ZvFE2oBDAmFp8=-y0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <1A27633A6DA49C4A92FCD5D4312DBF536A508A73@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
To: "Tahhan, Maryam" <maryam.tahhan@intel.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] ixgbe: account more Rx errors Issue
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2015 16:58:43 -0000

Hi Maryam,
Please see below.

> XEC counts the Number of receive IPv4, TCP, UDP or SCTP XSUM errors

Please note than UDP checksum is optional for IPv4, but UDP packets with =
zero checksum hit XEC.

> And general crc errors counts Counts the number of receive packets =
with CRC errors.

Let me explain you with an example.

DPDK 2.0 behavior:
host A sends 10M IPv4 UDP packets (no checksum) to host B
host B stats: 9M ipackets + 1M ierrors (missed) =3D 10M

DPDK 2.1 behavior:
host A sends 10M IPv4 UDP packets (no checksum) to host B
host B stats: 9M ipackets + 11M in ierrors (1M missed + 10M XEC) =3D =
20M?

> So our options are we can:
> 1. Add only one of these into the error stats.
> 2. We can introduce some cooking of stats in this scenario, so only =
add either or if they are equal or one is higher than the other.
> 3. Add them all which means you can have more errors than the number =
of received packets, but TBH this is going to be the case if your =
packets have multiple errors anyway.

4. ierrors should reflect NIC drops only.
XEC does not count drops, so IMO it should be removed from ierrors.

Please note that we still can access the XEC using rte_eth_xstats_get()


Regards,
Andriy=