From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lb0-f171.google.com (mail-lb0-f171.google.com [209.85.217.171]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 709015680 for ; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 15:35:48 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-lb0-f171.google.com with SMTP id bc4so47641426lbc.2 for ; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 06:35:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nfware-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=9u6zucKkaN3iqHMvFB/AvpQND2Qe86mf53MtKUm1aIs=; b=ZV8g5preevV4Md0XqcXwK5WMV/gAE7oWn6ufjY/ARp4hsOQIGqFYWGa4oJ+Kd5nAqK F3AAIymUr7TYFRqklXGcaG9jLUEGgvSB9espa5fcXTnhk1tXo/TpS2QirxMpyCx107R7 bFnqe3+a18LUo7sld1mA9Df536N8G1BumpGpNIAHE4cPwAyBOTrJV0Z63ge1rJlQOHID 7LsMXbBVPthgObZZ5Hb46fUdmyr6OBGKoCtO5D8oo9YmVzdqB06d18+dedc8lFKMQa+v N6YDt2CuPOH4/oVMmWWrE+SIXVMMJwDs5II6UjoVZuwQ/4n7pmxgGgZXJrVkgRa8RPb7 KDew== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=9u6zucKkaN3iqHMvFB/AvpQND2Qe86mf53MtKUm1aIs=; b=ZrTteTR0rUshIb9PAahNHtO4m2rBPGxivMZFWhfb8S+hmaHIMm5Fxw03O1EGtCMM7m 7tWBJmpTBk14AK3vfST79Q12BvLYD3J76wHPGgbfgWmcrE0yICM+nFxlr6xqEjcso45U DpHDaQiu0xAGMMgIvSbRttQjGVjVs+PpkhG8G1ME5Y92tG0rgWsmPS8TJMoQKHiRhTCS JZI87T48jImvlDJBKwPl6ZYukv1C6NzvBG3vV/Z5NtQRv+HKP+36+WL6VlZ+gIfdyX0q QJGjFau4UFd6UfEMfXz/TK0+ge35GZH2JRRAhOksCoYihXGgL8ZUdEdfZSyCw98n7iST tknw== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJK872syjcLHWNFEm5kPMSrf1FGC5DrCfU9lxm0d4jC3rgX/kCet14czp9RmudFJYQ== X-Received: by 10.112.210.130 with SMTP id mu2mr635449lbc.144.1456497348155; Fri, 26 Feb 2016 06:35:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from mbp-igor.arccn.local?arccn.lab?nfware.lab (vpn.arccn.ru. [95.182.74.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k3sm1935585lbp.9.2016.02.26.06.35.46 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Feb 2016 06:35:47 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\)) From: Igor Ryzhov In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 17:35:46 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <26CA3897-E24A-4B7B-918F-45679AA896E0@nfware.com> To: "Van Haaren, Harry" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112) Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Virtio xstats problem X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 14:35:48 -0000 Hello, Harry. Understood about size of packets. It's a bit confusing, because in all = other drivers undersized packet is an error. Maybe we should add another = one size bin for virtio - 60 to 63 bytes? I already checked about multicast/broadcast counters - broadcast packets = are counted twice: vq->multicast +=3D is_multicast_ether_addr(ea); vq->broadcast +=3D is_broadcast_ether_addr(ea); I think it should be something like: if (is_multicast_ether_addr(ea)) { if (is_broadcast_ether_addr(ea)) { vq->broadcast++; } else { vq->multicast++; } } Best regards, Igor > 26 =D1=84=D0=B5=D0=B2=D1=80. 2016 =D0=B3., =D0=B2 17:29, Van Haaren, = Harry =D0=BD=D0=B0=D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D0=B0=D0= =BB(=D0=B0): >=20 >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Igor Ryzhov >> I found some problem with virtio xstats counters. >>=20 >> Example: >>=20 >> rx_good_packets: 3 >> rx_good_bytes: 180 >> rx_errors: 0 >>=20 >> rx_q0_good_packets: 3 >> rx_q0_good_bytes: 180 >> rx_q0_errors: 0 >>=20 >> rx_q0_multicast_packets: 3 >> rx_q0_broadcast_packets: 1 >> rx_q0_undersize_packets: 3 >=20 >> It means that undersize packets are counted as good packets instead = of errors. >=20 > Are you sending 64 byte packets? There are no 4 bytes of CRC on = virtual > interfaces, so 60 bytes per packet is OK. >=20 >> Or maybe >> size of packet is calculated wrong. >> I don't have time now to check it more deeply - I can do it sometime = later, but maybe >> someone want to help. >=20 > Are the packets multicast or broadcast? > It looks like one of the counters there is wrong. >=20 >> PS. Is it a common practice to count broadcast packets twice - in = broadcast and multicast >> counters? >=20 > No packet should be counted twice - it must be put into one bucket of = mutli, broad or unicast. >=20 > -Harry