[v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
Checks
Commit Message
From: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com>
The netvsc should add to the values from the VF and report the sum.
Fixes: 4e9c73e96e ("net/netvsc: add Hyper-V network device")
Cc: stable@dpdk.org
Signed-off-by: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com>
---
drivers/net/netvsc/hn_ethdev.c | 10 +++++-----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Comments
On 3/24/2022 5:45 PM, longli@linuxonhyperv.com wrote:
> From: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com>
>
> The netvsc should add to the values from the VF and report the sum.
>
Per port stats already accumulated, like:
'stats->opackets += txq->stats.packets;'
> Fixes: 4e9c73e96e ("net/netvsc: add Hyper-V network device")
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> Signed-off-by: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/netvsc/hn_ethdev.c | 10 +++++-----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/netvsc/hn_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/netvsc/hn_ethdev.c
> index 0a357d3645..a6202d898b 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/netvsc/hn_ethdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/netvsc/hn_ethdev.c
> @@ -804,8 +804,8 @@ static int hn_dev_stats_get(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> stats->oerrors += txq->stats.errors;
>
> if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
> - stats->q_opackets[i] = txq->stats.packets;
> - stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
> + stats->q_opackets[i] += txq->stats.packets;
> + stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
This is per queue stats, 'stats->q_opackets[i]', in next iteration of
the loop, 'i' will be increased and 'txq' will be updated, so as far as
I can see the above change has no affect.
> }
> }
>
> @@ -821,12 +821,12 @@ static int hn_dev_stats_get(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
> stats->imissed += rxq->stats.ring_full;
>
> if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
> - stats->q_ipackets[i] = rxq->stats.packets;
> - stats->q_ibytes[i] = rxq->stats.bytes;
> + stats->q_ipackets[i] += rxq->stats.packets;
> + stats->q_ibytes[i] += rxq->stats.bytes;
> }
> }
>
> - stats->rx_nombuf = dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed;
> + stats->rx_nombuf += dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed;
Why '+='? Is 'dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed' reset somewhere between
two consecutive stats get call?
Anyway, above line has no affect, since the 'stats->rx_nombuf' is
overwritten by 'rte_eth_stats_get()'. So above line can be removed.
> return 0;
> }
>
On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:56:14 +0100
Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
> > if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
> > - stats->q_opackets[i] = txq->stats.packets;
> > - stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
> > + stats->q_opackets[i] += txq->stats.packets;
> > + stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
>
> This is per queue stats, 'stats->q_opackets[i]', in next iteration of
> the loop, 'i' will be increased and 'txq' will be updated, so as far as
> I can see the above change has no affect.
Agree, that is why it was just assignment originally.
> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:56:14 +0100
> Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
>
> > > if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
> > > - stats->q_opackets[i] = txq->stats.packets;
> > > - stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
> > > + stats->q_opackets[i] += txq->stats.packets;
> > > + stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
> >
> > This is per queue stats, 'stats->q_opackets[i]', in next iteration of
> > the loop, 'i' will be increased and 'txq' will be updated, so as far
> > as I can see the above change has no affect.
>
> Agree, that is why it was just assignment originally.
The condition here is a little different. NETVSC is a master device with another PMD running as a slave. When reporting stats values, it needs to add the values from the slave PMD. The original code just overwrites the values from its slave PMD.
On 5/3/2022 7:18 PM, Long Li wrote:
>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>
>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:56:14 +0100
>> Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
>>>> - stats->q_opackets[i] = txq->stats.packets;
>>>> - stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
>>>> + stats->q_opackets[i] += txq->stats.packets;
>>>> + stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
>>>
>>> This is per queue stats, 'stats->q_opackets[i]', in next iteration of
>>> the loop, 'i' will be increased and 'txq' will be updated, so as far
>>> as I can see the above change has no affect.
>>
>> Agree, that is why it was just assignment originally.
>
> The condition here is a little different. NETVSC is a master device with another PMD running as a slave. When reporting stats values, it needs to add the values from the slave PMD. The original code just overwrites the values from its slave PMD.
Where the initial values are coming from, 'hn_vf_stats_get()'?
If 'hn_vf_stats_get()' fills the stats, what are the values kept in
'txq->stats.*' in above updated loop?
> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>
> On 5/3/2022 7:18 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>
> >> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:56:14 +0100
> >> Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
> >>>> - stats->q_opackets[i] = txq->stats.packets;
> >>>> - stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
> >>>> + stats->q_opackets[i] += txq->stats.packets;
> >>>> + stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
> >>>
> >>> This is per queue stats, 'stats->q_opackets[i]', in next iteration
> >>> of the loop, 'i' will be increased and 'txq' will be updated, so as
> >>> far as I can see the above change has no affect.
> >>
> >> Agree, that is why it was just assignment originally.
> >
> > The condition here is a little different. NETVSC is a master device with
> another PMD running as a slave. When reporting stats values, it needs to add
> the values from the slave PMD. The original code just overwrites the values
> from its slave PMD.
>
> Where the initial values are coming from, 'hn_vf_stats_get()'?
>
> If 'hn_vf_stats_get()' fills the stats, what are the values kept in 'txq->stats.*'
> in above updated loop?
Yes, hn_vf_stats_get() fills in the stats from the slave PMD. txq->stats values are from the master PMD. Those values are different and accounted separated from the values from the slave PMD.
On 5/3/2022 8:14 PM, Long Li wrote:
>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>
>> On 5/3/2022 7:18 PM, Long Li wrote:
>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:56:14 +0100
>>>> Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
>>>>>> - stats->q_opackets[i] = txq->stats.packets;
>>>>>> - stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
>>>>>> + stats->q_opackets[i] += txq->stats.packets;
>>>>>> + stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
>>>>>
>>>>> This is per queue stats, 'stats->q_opackets[i]', in next iteration
>>>>> of the loop, 'i' will be increased and 'txq' will be updated, so as
>>>>> far as I can see the above change has no affect.
>>>>
>>>> Agree, that is why it was just assignment originally.
>>>
>>> The condition here is a little different. NETVSC is a master device with
>> another PMD running as a slave. When reporting stats values, it needs to add
>> the values from the slave PMD. The original code just overwrites the values
>> from its slave PMD.
>>
>> Where the initial values are coming from, 'hn_vf_stats_get()'?
>>
>> If 'hn_vf_stats_get()' fills the stats, what are the values kept in 'txq->stats.*'
>> in above updated loop?
>
> Yes, hn_vf_stats_get() fills in the stats from the slave PMD. txq->stats values are from the master PMD. Those values are different and accounted separated from the values from the slave PMD.
I see, since this is a little different than what most of the PMDs do,
can you please put a little more info to the commit log? Or perhaps can
add some comments to the code.
And still 'stats->rx_nombuf' change is not required right? If so can you
remove it in the next version?
> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>
> On 5/3/2022 8:14 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>
> >> On 5/3/2022 7:18 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:56:14 +0100
> >>>> Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>> if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
> >>>>>> - stats->q_opackets[i] = txq->stats.packets;
> >>>>>> - stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
> >>>>>> + stats->q_opackets[i] += txq->stats.packets;
> >>>>>> + stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This is per queue stats, 'stats->q_opackets[i]', in next iteration
> >>>>> of the loop, 'i' will be increased and 'txq' will be updated, so
> >>>>> as far as I can see the above change has no affect.
> >>>>
> >>>> Agree, that is why it was just assignment originally.
> >>>
> >>> The condition here is a little different. NETVSC is a master device
> >>> with
> >> another PMD running as a slave. When reporting stats values, it needs
> >> to add the values from the slave PMD. The original code just
> >> overwrites the values from its slave PMD.
> >>
> >> Where the initial values are coming from, 'hn_vf_stats_get()'?
> >>
> >> If 'hn_vf_stats_get()' fills the stats, what are the values kept in 'txq-
> >stats.*'
> >> in above updated loop?
> >
> > Yes, hn_vf_stats_get() fills in the stats from the slave PMD. txq->stats
> values are from the master PMD. Those values are different and accounted
> separated from the values from the slave PMD.
>
> I see, since this is a little different than what most of the PMDs do, can you
> please put a little more info to the commit log? Or perhaps can add some
> comments to the code.
Ok, will do.
>
> And still 'stats->rx_nombuf' change is not required right? If so can you
> remove it in the next version?
It is still needed. NETVSC unconditionally calls the slave PMD to receive packets, even if it can't allocate a mbuf to receive a synthetic packet itself. The accounting of rx_nombuf is valid because the synthetic packets (to NETVSC) and VF packets (to slave PMD) are routed separately from Hyper-V.
On 5/3/2022 9:48 PM, Long Li wrote:
>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>
>> On 5/3/2022 8:14 PM, Long Li wrote:
>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>>>
>>>> On 5/3/2022 7:18 PM, Long Li wrote:
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:56:14 +0100
>>>>>> Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
>>>>>>>> - stats->q_opackets[i] = txq->stats.packets;
>>>>>>>> - stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
>>>>>>>> + stats->q_opackets[i] += txq->stats.packets;
>>>>>>>> + stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is per queue stats, 'stats->q_opackets[i]', in next iteration
>>>>>>> of the loop, 'i' will be increased and 'txq' will be updated, so
>>>>>>> as far as I can see the above change has no affect.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Agree, that is why it was just assignment originally.
>>>>>
>>>>> The condition here is a little different. NETVSC is a master device
>>>>> with
>>>> another PMD running as a slave. When reporting stats values, it needs
>>>> to add the values from the slave PMD. The original code just
>>>> overwrites the values from its slave PMD.
>>>>
>>>> Where the initial values are coming from, 'hn_vf_stats_get()'?
>>>>
>>>> If 'hn_vf_stats_get()' fills the stats, what are the values kept in 'txq-
>>> stats.*'
>>>> in above updated loop?
>>>
>>> Yes, hn_vf_stats_get() fills in the stats from the slave PMD. txq->stats
>> values are from the master PMD. Those values are different and accounted
>> separated from the values from the slave PMD.
>>
>> I see, since this is a little different than what most of the PMDs do, can you
>> please put a little more info to the commit log? Or perhaps can add some
>> comments to the code.
>
> Ok, will do.
>
>>
>> And still 'stats->rx_nombuf' change is not required right? If so can you
>> remove it in the next version?
>
> It is still needed. NETVSC unconditionally calls the slave PMD to receive packets, even if it can't allocate a mbuf to receive a synthetic packet itself. The accounting of rx_nombuf is valid because the synthetic packets (to NETVSC) and VF packets (to slave PMD) are routed separately from Hyper-V.
I am not referring to the "+=" update, my comment was because
'stats->rx_nombuf' is overwritten in 'rte_eth_stats_get()' [1].
Is it still required?
[1]
https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/tree/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.c?h=v22.03#n2518
> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>
> On 5/3/2022 9:48 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>
> >> On 5/3/2022 8:14 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>>>
> >>>> On 5/3/2022 7:18 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:56:14 +0100 Ferruh Yigit
> >>>>>> <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
> >>>>>>>> - stats->q_opackets[i] = txq->stats.packets;
> >>>>>>>> - stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
> >>>>>>>> + stats->q_opackets[i] += txq->stats.packets;
> >>>>>>>> + stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This is per queue stats, 'stats->q_opackets[i]', in next
> >>>>>>> iteration of the loop, 'i' will be increased and 'txq' will be
> >>>>>>> updated, so as far as I can see the above change has no affect.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Agree, that is why it was just assignment originally.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The condition here is a little different. NETVSC is a master
> >>>>> device with
> >>>> another PMD running as a slave. When reporting stats values, it
> >>>> needs to add the values from the slave PMD. The original code just
> >>>> overwrites the values from its slave PMD.
> >>>>
> >>>> Where the initial values are coming from, 'hn_vf_stats_get()'?
> >>>>
> >>>> If 'hn_vf_stats_get()' fills the stats, what are the values kept in
> >>>> 'txq-
> >>> stats.*'
> >>>> in above updated loop?
> >>>
> >>> Yes, hn_vf_stats_get() fills in the stats from the slave PMD.
> >>> txq->stats
> >> values are from the master PMD. Those values are different and
> >> accounted separated from the values from the slave PMD.
> >>
> >> I see, since this is a little different than what most of the PMDs
> >> do, can you please put a little more info to the commit log? Or
> >> perhaps can add some comments to the code.
> >
> > Ok, will do.
> >
> >>
> >> And still 'stats->rx_nombuf' change is not required right? If so can
> >> you remove it in the next version?
> >
> > It is still needed. NETVSC unconditionally calls the slave PMD to receive
> packets, even if it can't allocate a mbuf to receive a synthetic packet itself. The
> accounting of rx_nombuf is valid because the synthetic packets (to NETVSC) and
> VF packets (to slave PMD) are routed separately from Hyper-V.
>
> I am not referring to the "+=" update, my comment was because 'stats-
> >rx_nombuf' is overwritten in 'rte_eth_stats_get()' [1].
> Is it still required?
Yes, it is still needed. NETVSC calls the rte_eth_stats_get() on its slave PMD first, and stats->rx_nombuf is updated (overwritten) for its slave PMD. Afte that, it needs to add to its own dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed back to stats->rx_nombuf.
>
> [1]
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit.dpdk
> .org%2Fdpdk%2Ftree%2Flib%2Fethdev%2Frte_ethdev.c%3Fh%3Dv22.03%23n25
> 18&data=05%7C01%7Clongli%40microsoft.com%7Cea473df2344c460d575
> d08da2dca3e53%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C63787
> 2643902917430%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQ
> IjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sd
> ata=FZO%2B%2BnWtLGstHHIZ2aXsDUKNI%2Fi9tbj6jONhp174qKw%3D&res
> erved=0
On 5/4/2022 7:38 PM, Long Li wrote:
>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>
>> On 5/3/2022 9:48 PM, Long Li wrote:
>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>>>
>>>> On 5/3/2022 8:14 PM, Long Li wrote:
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/3/2022 7:18 PM, Long Li wrote:
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:56:14 +0100 Ferruh Yigit
>>>>>>>> <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
>>>>>>>>>> - stats->q_opackets[i] = txq->stats.packets;
>>>>>>>>>> - stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
>>>>>>>>>> + stats->q_opackets[i] += txq->stats.packets;
>>>>>>>>>> + stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is per queue stats, 'stats->q_opackets[i]', in next
>>>>>>>>> iteration of the loop, 'i' will be increased and 'txq' will be
>>>>>>>>> updated, so as far as I can see the above change has no affect.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Agree, that is why it was just assignment originally.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The condition here is a little different. NETVSC is a master
>>>>>>> device with
>>>>>> another PMD running as a slave. When reporting stats values, it
>>>>>> needs to add the values from the slave PMD. The original code just
>>>>>> overwrites the values from its slave PMD.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where the initial values are coming from, 'hn_vf_stats_get()'?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If 'hn_vf_stats_get()' fills the stats, what are the values kept in
>>>>>> 'txq-
>>>>> stats.*'
>>>>>> in above updated loop?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, hn_vf_stats_get() fills in the stats from the slave PMD.
>>>>> txq->stats
>>>> values are from the master PMD. Those values are different and
>>>> accounted separated from the values from the slave PMD.
>>>>
>>>> I see, since this is a little different than what most of the PMDs
>>>> do, can you please put a little more info to the commit log? Or
>>>> perhaps can add some comments to the code.
>>>
>>> Ok, will do.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> And still 'stats->rx_nombuf' change is not required right? If so can
>>>> you remove it in the next version?
>>>
>>> It is still needed. NETVSC unconditionally calls the slave PMD to receive
>> packets, even if it can't allocate a mbuf to receive a synthetic packet itself. The
>> accounting of rx_nombuf is valid because the synthetic packets (to NETVSC) and
>> VF packets (to slave PMD) are routed separately from Hyper-V.
>>
>> I am not referring to the "+=" update, my comment was because 'stats-
>>> rx_nombuf' is overwritten in 'rte_eth_stats_get()' [1].
>> Is it still required?
>
> Yes, it is still needed. NETVSC calls the rte_eth_stats_get() on its slave PMD first, and stats->rx_nombuf is updated (overwritten) for its slave PMD. Afte that, it needs to add to its own dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed back to stats->rx_nombuf.
>
But its own stat also will be overwritten (not in PMD function, but in
ethdev layer).
'stats->rx_nombuf' assignment in the PMD seems has no effect and can be
removed.
I can't see how it is needed, can you please put a call stack to describe?
>>
>> [1]
>> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit.dpdk
>> .org%2Fdpdk%2Ftree%2Flib%2Fethdev%2Frte_ethdev.c%3Fh%3Dv22.03%23n25
>> 18&data=05%7C01%7Clongli%40microsoft.com%7Cea473df2344c460d575
>> d08da2dca3e53%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C63787
>> 2643902917430%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQ
>> IjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sd
>> ata=FZO%2B%2BnWtLGstHHIZ2aXsDUKNI%2Fi9tbj6jONhp174qKw%3D&res
>> erved=0
On Thu, 5 May 2022 17:28:38 +0100
Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
> On 5/4/2022 7:38 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>
> >> On 5/3/2022 9:48 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>>>
> >>>> On 5/3/2022 8:14 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 5/3/2022 7:18 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:56:14 +0100 Ferruh Yigit
> >>>>>>>> <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
> >>>>>>>>>> - stats->q_opackets[i] = txq->stats.packets;
> >>>>>>>>>> - stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
> >>>>>>>>>> + stats->q_opackets[i] += txq->stats.packets;
> >>>>>>>>>> + stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> This is per queue stats, 'stats->q_opackets[i]', in next
> >>>>>>>>> iteration of the loop, 'i' will be increased and 'txq' will be
> >>>>>>>>> updated, so as far as I can see the above change has no affect.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Agree, that is why it was just assignment originally.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The condition here is a little different. NETVSC is a master
> >>>>>>> device with
> >>>>>> another PMD running as a slave. When reporting stats values, it
> >>>>>> needs to add the values from the slave PMD. The original code just
> >>>>>> overwrites the values from its slave PMD.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Where the initial values are coming from, 'hn_vf_stats_get()'?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If 'hn_vf_stats_get()' fills the stats, what are the values kept in
> >>>>>> 'txq-
> >>>>> stats.*'
> >>>>>> in above updated loop?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes, hn_vf_stats_get() fills in the stats from the slave PMD.
> >>>>> txq->stats
> >>>> values are from the master PMD. Those values are different and
> >>>> accounted separated from the values from the slave PMD.
> >>>>
> >>>> I see, since this is a little different than what most of the PMDs
> >>>> do, can you please put a little more info to the commit log? Or
> >>>> perhaps can add some comments to the code.
> >>>
> >>> Ok, will do.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> And still 'stats->rx_nombuf' change is not required right? If so can
> >>>> you remove it in the next version?
> >>>
> >>> It is still needed. NETVSC unconditionally calls the slave PMD to receive
> >> packets, even if it can't allocate a mbuf to receive a synthetic packet itself. The
> >> accounting of rx_nombuf is valid because the synthetic packets (to NETVSC) and
> >> VF packets (to slave PMD) are routed separately from Hyper-V.
> >>
> >> I am not referring to the "+=" update, my comment was because 'stats-
> >>> rx_nombuf' is overwritten in 'rte_eth_stats_get()' [1].
> >> Is it still required?
> >
> > Yes, it is still needed. NETVSC calls the rte_eth_stats_get() on its slave PMD first, and stats->rx_nombuf is updated (overwritten) for its slave PMD. Afte that, it needs to add to its own dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed back to stats->rx_nombuf.
> >
>
> But its own stat also will be overwritten (not in PMD function, but in
> ethdev layer).
> 'stats->rx_nombuf' assignment in the PMD seems has no effect and can be
> removed.
>
> I can't see how it is needed, can you please put a call stack to describe?
This here:
int
rte_eth_stats_get(uint16_t port_id, struct rte_eth_stats *stats)
{
struct rte_eth_dev *dev;
RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -ENODEV);
dev = &rte_eth_devices[port_id];
if (stats == NULL) {
RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, "Cannot get ethdev port %u stats to NULL\n",
port_id);
return -EINVAL;
}
memset(stats, 0, sizeof(*stats));
RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->stats_get, -ENOTSUP);
stats->rx_nombuf = dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed;
return eth_err(port_id, (*dev->dev_ops->stats_get)(dev, stats));
}
Will fill in rx_nombuf from the current rx_mbuf_alloc_failed.
But it happens before the PMD specific stats function.
For the case of nested device like netvsc PMD that value needs to
be summed.
What happens with VF would be:
Call of rte_eth_stats_get on the netvsc PMD port.
stats->rx_nombuf comes from rx_mbuf_alloc_failed of the vmbus part
Netvsc PMD stats get calls rte_eth_stats_get on the VF
Nested rte_eth_stats_get will set stats->rx_nombuf to the value from VF
the previous value is overwritten.
At end of Netvsc PMD stats get it should be adding the value of any
allocation failures in the VMBUS part.
Summary:
rte_eth_stats_get: stats->rx_nombuf = dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed; // original
rte_eth_stats_get(vf): stats->rx_nombuf = dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed; // VF alloc failed
hn_dev_stats_get: stats->rx_nombuf += dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed; // Vmbus alloc failed
On 5/5/2022 5:40 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Thu, 5 May 2022 17:28:38 +0100
> Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/4/2022 7:38 PM, Long Li wrote:
>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>>>
>>>> On 5/3/2022 9:48 PM, Long Li wrote:
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/3/2022 8:14 PM, Long Li wrote:
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 5/3/2022 7:18 PM, Long Li wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:56:14 +0100 Ferruh Yigit
>>>>>>>>>> <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
>>>>>>>>>>>> - stats->q_opackets[i] = txq->stats.packets;
>>>>>>>>>>>> - stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
>>>>>>>>>>>> + stats->q_opackets[i] += txq->stats.packets;
>>>>>>>>>>>> + stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This is per queue stats, 'stats->q_opackets[i]', in next
>>>>>>>>>>> iteration of the loop, 'i' will be increased and 'txq' will be
>>>>>>>>>>> updated, so as far as I can see the above change has no affect.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Agree, that is why it was just assignment originally.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The condition here is a little different. NETVSC is a master
>>>>>>>>> device with
>>>>>>>> another PMD running as a slave. When reporting stats values, it
>>>>>>>> needs to add the values from the slave PMD. The original code just
>>>>>>>> overwrites the values from its slave PMD.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Where the initial values are coming from, 'hn_vf_stats_get()'?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If 'hn_vf_stats_get()' fills the stats, what are the values kept in
>>>>>>>> 'txq-
>>>>>>> stats.*'
>>>>>>>> in above updated loop?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, hn_vf_stats_get() fills in the stats from the slave PMD.
>>>>>>> txq->stats
>>>>>> values are from the master PMD. Those values are different and
>>>>>> accounted separated from the values from the slave PMD.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I see, since this is a little different than what most of the PMDs
>>>>>> do, can you please put a little more info to the commit log? Or
>>>>>> perhaps can add some comments to the code.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, will do.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And still 'stats->rx_nombuf' change is not required right? If so can
>>>>>> you remove it in the next version?
>>>>>
>>>>> It is still needed. NETVSC unconditionally calls the slave PMD to receive
>>>> packets, even if it can't allocate a mbuf to receive a synthetic packet itself. The
>>>> accounting of rx_nombuf is valid because the synthetic packets (to NETVSC) and
>>>> VF packets (to slave PMD) are routed separately from Hyper-V.
>>>>
>>>> I am not referring to the "+=" update, my comment was because 'stats-
>>>>> rx_nombuf' is overwritten in 'rte_eth_stats_get()' [1].
>>>> Is it still required?
>>>
>>> Yes, it is still needed. NETVSC calls the rte_eth_stats_get() on its slave PMD first, and stats->rx_nombuf is updated (overwritten) for its slave PMD. Afte that, it needs to add to its own dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed back to stats->rx_nombuf.
>>>
>>
>> But its own stat also will be overwritten (not in PMD function, but in
>> ethdev layer).
>> 'stats->rx_nombuf' assignment in the PMD seems has no effect and can be
>> removed.
>>
>> I can't see how it is needed, can you please put a call stack to describe?
>
> This here:
>
>
> int
> rte_eth_stats_get(uint16_t port_id, struct rte_eth_stats *stats)
> {
> struct rte_eth_dev *dev;
>
> RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -ENODEV);
> dev = &rte_eth_devices[port_id];
>
> if (stats == NULL) {
> RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, "Cannot get ethdev port %u stats to NULL\n",
> port_id);
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> memset(stats, 0, sizeof(*stats));
>
> RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->stats_get, -ENOTSUP);
> stats->rx_nombuf = dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed;
> return eth_err(port_id, (*dev->dev_ops->stats_get)(dev, stats));
> }
>
> Will fill in rx_nombuf from the current rx_mbuf_alloc_failed.
> But it happens before the PMD specific stats function.
>
I keep seeing the ethdev assignment as *after* the dev_ops, but it is
not [1], so code is OK as it is.
[1]
It seems assignment was after but it is fixed on the way:
Commit 53ecfa24fbcd ("ethdev: fix overwriting driver-specific stats")
> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>
> On 5/5/2022 5:40 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Thu, 5 May 2022 17:28:38 +0100
> > Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 5/4/2022 7:38 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>>>
> >>>> On 5/3/2022 9:48 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 5/3/2022 8:14 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 5/3/2022 7:18 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats
> >>>>>>>>>> values
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:56:14 +0100 Ferruh Yigit
> >>>>>>>>>> <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
> >>>>>>>>>>>> - stats->q_opackets[i] = txq->stats.packets;
> >>>>>>>>>>>> - stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
> >>>>>>>>>>>> + stats->q_opackets[i] += txq-
> >stats.packets;
> >>>>>>>>>>>> + stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> This is per queue stats, 'stats->q_opackets[i]', in next
> >>>>>>>>>>> iteration of the loop, 'i' will be increased and 'txq' will
> >>>>>>>>>>> be updated, so as far as I can see the above change has no affect.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Agree, that is why it was just assignment originally.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> The condition here is a little different. NETVSC is a master
> >>>>>>>>> device with
> >>>>>>>> another PMD running as a slave. When reporting stats values, it
> >>>>>>>> needs to add the values from the slave PMD. The original code
> >>>>>>>> just overwrites the values from its slave PMD.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Where the initial values are coming from, 'hn_vf_stats_get()'?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If 'hn_vf_stats_get()' fills the stats, what are the values
> >>>>>>>> kept in
> >>>>>>>> 'txq-
> >>>>>>> stats.*'
> >>>>>>>> in above updated loop?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Yes, hn_vf_stats_get() fills in the stats from the slave PMD.
> >>>>>>> txq->stats
> >>>>>> values are from the master PMD. Those values are different and
> >>>>>> accounted separated from the values from the slave PMD.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I see, since this is a little different than what most of the
> >>>>>> PMDs do, can you please put a little more info to the commit log?
> >>>>>> Or perhaps can add some comments to the code.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ok, will do.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And still 'stats->rx_nombuf' change is not required right? If so
> >>>>>> can you remove it in the next version?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It is still needed. NETVSC unconditionally calls the slave PMD to
> >>>>> receive
> >>>> packets, even if it can't allocate a mbuf to receive a synthetic
> >>>> packet itself. The accounting of rx_nombuf is valid because the
> >>>> synthetic packets (to NETVSC) and VF packets (to slave PMD) are routed
> separately from Hyper-V.
> >>>>
> >>>> I am not referring to the "+=" update, my comment was because
> >>>> 'stats-
> >>>>> rx_nombuf' is overwritten in 'rte_eth_stats_get()' [1].
> >>>> Is it still required?
> >>>
> >>> Yes, it is still needed. NETVSC calls the rte_eth_stats_get() on its slave PMD
> first, and stats->rx_nombuf is updated (overwritten) for its slave PMD. Afte that,
> it needs to add to its own dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed back to stats-
> >rx_nombuf.
> >>>
> >>
> >> But its own stat also will be overwritten (not in PMD function, but
> >> in ethdev layer).
> >> 'stats->rx_nombuf' assignment in the PMD seems has no effect and can
> >> be removed.
> >>
> >> I can't see how it is needed, can you please put a call stack to describe?
> >
> > This here:
> >
> >
> > int
> > rte_eth_stats_get(uint16_t port_id, struct rte_eth_stats *stats) {
> > struct rte_eth_dev *dev;
> >
> > RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -ENODEV);
> > dev = &rte_eth_devices[port_id];
> >
> > if (stats == NULL) {
> > RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, "Cannot get ethdev port %u stats to
> NULL\n",
> > port_id);
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
> >
> > memset(stats, 0, sizeof(*stats));
> >
> > RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->stats_get, -ENOTSUP);
> > stats->rx_nombuf = dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed;
> > return eth_err(port_id, (*dev->dev_ops->stats_get)(dev, stats)); }
> >
> > Will fill in rx_nombuf from the current rx_mbuf_alloc_failed.
> > But it happens before the PMD specific stats function.
> >
>
> I keep seeing the ethdev assignment as *after* the dev_ops, but it is not [1], so
> code is OK as it is.
Hi Ferruh,
Do you still want me to send a v3, or this patch is good as it is?
Long
>
>
> [1]
> It seems assignment was after but it is fixed on the way:
> Commit 53ecfa24fbcd ("ethdev: fix overwriting driver-specific stats")
On 5/10/2022 6:33 AM, Long Li wrote:
>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>
>> On 5/5/2022 5:40 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>>> On Thu, 5 May 2022 17:28:38 +0100
>>> Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/4/2022 7:38 PM, Long Li wrote:
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/3/2022 9:48 PM, Long Li wrote:
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 5/3/2022 8:14 PM, Long Li wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 5/3/2022 7:18 PM, Long Li wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats
>>>>>>>>>>>> values
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:56:14 +0100 Ferruh Yigit
>>>>>>>>>>>> <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - stats->q_opackets[i] = txq->stats.packets;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + stats->q_opackets[i] += txq-
>>> stats.packets;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is per queue stats, 'stats->q_opackets[i]', in next
>>>>>>>>>>>>> iteration of the loop, 'i' will be increased and 'txq' will
>>>>>>>>>>>>> be updated, so as far as I can see the above change has no affect.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree, that is why it was just assignment originally.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The condition here is a little different. NETVSC is a master
>>>>>>>>>>> device with
>>>>>>>>>> another PMD running as a slave. When reporting stats values, it
>>>>>>>>>> needs to add the values from the slave PMD. The original code
>>>>>>>>>> just overwrites the values from its slave PMD.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Where the initial values are coming from, 'hn_vf_stats_get()'?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If 'hn_vf_stats_get()' fills the stats, what are the values
>>>>>>>>>> kept in
>>>>>>>>>> 'txq-
>>>>>>>>> stats.*'
>>>>>>>>>> in above updated loop?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes, hn_vf_stats_get() fills in the stats from the slave PMD.
>>>>>>>>> txq->stats
>>>>>>>> values are from the master PMD. Those values are different and
>>>>>>>> accounted separated from the values from the slave PMD.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I see, since this is a little different than what most of the
>>>>>>>> PMDs do, can you please put a little more info to the commit log?
>>>>>>>> Or perhaps can add some comments to the code.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ok, will do.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And still 'stats->rx_nombuf' change is not required right? If so
>>>>>>>> can you remove it in the next version?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is still needed. NETVSC unconditionally calls the slave PMD to
>>>>>>> receive
>>>>>> packets, even if it can't allocate a mbuf to receive a synthetic
>>>>>> packet itself. The accounting of rx_nombuf is valid because the
>>>>>> synthetic packets (to NETVSC) and VF packets (to slave PMD) are routed
>> separately from Hyper-V.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am not referring to the "+=" update, my comment was because
>>>>>> 'stats-
>>>>>>> rx_nombuf' is overwritten in 'rte_eth_stats_get()' [1].
>>>>>> Is it still required?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it is still needed. NETVSC calls the rte_eth_stats_get() on its slave PMD
>> first, and stats->rx_nombuf is updated (overwritten) for its slave PMD. Afte that,
>> it needs to add to its own dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed back to stats-
>>> rx_nombuf.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But its own stat also will be overwritten (not in PMD function, but
>>>> in ethdev layer).
>>>> 'stats->rx_nombuf' assignment in the PMD seems has no effect and can
>>>> be removed.
>>>>
>>>> I can't see how it is needed, can you please put a call stack to describe?
>>>
>>> This here:
>>>
>>>
>>> int
>>> rte_eth_stats_get(uint16_t port_id, struct rte_eth_stats *stats) {
>>> struct rte_eth_dev *dev;
>>>
>>> RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -ENODEV);
>>> dev = &rte_eth_devices[port_id];
>>>
>>> if (stats == NULL) {
>>> RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, "Cannot get ethdev port %u stats to
>> NULL\n",
>>> port_id);
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>> }
>>>
>>> memset(stats, 0, sizeof(*stats));
>>>
>>> RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->stats_get, -ENOTSUP);
>>> stats->rx_nombuf = dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed;
>>> return eth_err(port_id, (*dev->dev_ops->stats_get)(dev, stats)); }
>>>
>>> Will fill in rx_nombuf from the current rx_mbuf_alloc_failed.
>>> But it happens before the PMD specific stats function.
>>>
>>
>> I keep seeing the ethdev assignment as *after* the dev_ops, but it is not [1], so
>> code is OK as it is.
>
> Hi Ferruh,
>
> Do you still want me to send a v3, or this patch is good as it is?
>
Yes can you please send a v3 with some more description in the commit
log on the special case for the PMD, and perhaps some comments in the code.
Thanks,
ferruh
> Long
>
>>
>>
>> [1]
>> It seems assignment was after but it is fixed on the way:
>> Commit 53ecfa24fbcd ("ethdev: fix overwriting driver-specific stats")
> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
>
> On 5/10/2022 6:33 AM, Long Li wrote:
> >> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>
> >> On 5/5/2022 5:40 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 5 May 2022 17:28:38 +0100
> >>> Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 5/4/2022 7:38 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 5/3/2022 9:48 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats values
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 5/3/2022 8:14 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats
> >>>>>>>>>> values
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 5/3/2022 7:18 PM, Long Li wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Patch v2] net/netvsc: report correct stats
> >>>>>>>>>>>> values
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 22:56:14 +0100 Ferruh Yigit
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <ferruh.yigit@xilinx.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - stats->q_opackets[i] = txq-
> >stats.packets;
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> + stats->q_opackets[i] += txq-
> >>> stats.packets;
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> + stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> This is per queue stats, 'stats->q_opackets[i]', in next
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> iteration of the loop, 'i' will be increased and 'txq'
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> will be updated, so as far as I can see the above change has no
> affect.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Agree, that is why it was just assignment originally.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The condition here is a little different. NETVSC is a master
> >>>>>>>>>>> device with
> >>>>>>>>>> another PMD running as a slave. When reporting stats values,
> >>>>>>>>>> it needs to add the values from the slave PMD. The original
> >>>>>>>>>> code just overwrites the values from its slave PMD.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Where the initial values are coming from, 'hn_vf_stats_get()'?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> If 'hn_vf_stats_get()' fills the stats, what are the values
> >>>>>>>>>> kept in
> >>>>>>>>>> 'txq-
> >>>>>>>>> stats.*'
> >>>>>>>>>> in above updated loop?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Yes, hn_vf_stats_get() fills in the stats from the slave PMD.
> >>>>>>>>> txq->stats
> >>>>>>>> values are from the master PMD. Those values are different and
> >>>>>>>> accounted separated from the values from the slave PMD.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I see, since this is a little different than what most of the
> >>>>>>>> PMDs do, can you please put a little more info to the commit log?
> >>>>>>>> Or perhaps can add some comments to the code.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Ok, will do.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> And still 'stats->rx_nombuf' change is not required right? If
> >>>>>>>> so can you remove it in the next version?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It is still needed. NETVSC unconditionally calls the slave PMD
> >>>>>>> to receive
> >>>>>> packets, even if it can't allocate a mbuf to receive a synthetic
> >>>>>> packet itself. The accounting of rx_nombuf is valid because the
> >>>>>> synthetic packets (to NETVSC) and VF packets (to slave PMD) are
> >>>>>> routed
> >> separately from Hyper-V.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am not referring to the "+=" update, my comment was because
> >>>>>> 'stats-
> >>>>>>> rx_nombuf' is overwritten in 'rte_eth_stats_get()' [1].
> >>>>>> Is it still required?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes, it is still needed. NETVSC calls the rte_eth_stats_get() on
> >>>>> its slave PMD
> >> first, and stats->rx_nombuf is updated (overwritten) for its slave
> >> PMD. Afte that, it needs to add to its own
> >> dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed back to stats-
> >>> rx_nombuf.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> But its own stat also will be overwritten (not in PMD function, but
> >>>> in ethdev layer).
> >>>> 'stats->rx_nombuf' assignment in the PMD seems has no effect and
> >>>> can be removed.
> >>>>
> >>>> I can't see how it is needed, can you please put a call stack to describe?
> >>>
> >>> This here:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> int
> >>> rte_eth_stats_get(uint16_t port_id, struct rte_eth_stats *stats) {
> >>> struct rte_eth_dev *dev;
> >>>
> >>> RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -ENODEV);
> >>> dev = &rte_eth_devices[port_id];
> >>>
> >>> if (stats == NULL) {
> >>> RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, "Cannot get ethdev port %u stats to
> >> NULL\n",
> >>> port_id);
> >>> return -EINVAL;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> memset(stats, 0, sizeof(*stats));
> >>>
> >>> RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->stats_get, -ENOTSUP);
> >>> stats->rx_nombuf = dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed;
> >>> return eth_err(port_id, (*dev->dev_ops->stats_get)(dev, stats)); }
> >>>
> >>> Will fill in rx_nombuf from the current rx_mbuf_alloc_failed.
> >>> But it happens before the PMD specific stats function.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I keep seeing the ethdev assignment as *after* the dev_ops, but it is
> >> not [1], so code is OK as it is.
> >
> > Hi Ferruh,
> >
> > Do you still want me to send a v3, or this patch is good as it is?
> >
>
> Yes can you please send a v3 with some more description in the commit log on
> the special case for the PMD, and perhaps some comments in the code.
>
> Thanks,
> Ferruh
Yes, will send out shortly.
@@ -804,8 +804,8 @@ static int hn_dev_stats_get(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
stats->oerrors += txq->stats.errors;
if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
- stats->q_opackets[i] = txq->stats.packets;
- stats->q_obytes[i] = txq->stats.bytes;
+ stats->q_opackets[i] += txq->stats.packets;
+ stats->q_obytes[i] += txq->stats.bytes;
}
}
@@ -821,12 +821,12 @@ static int hn_dev_stats_get(struct rte_eth_dev *dev,
stats->imissed += rxq->stats.ring_full;
if (i < RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS) {
- stats->q_ipackets[i] = rxq->stats.packets;
- stats->q_ibytes[i] = rxq->stats.bytes;
+ stats->q_ipackets[i] += rxq->stats.packets;
+ stats->q_ibytes[i] += rxq->stats.bytes;
}
}
- stats->rx_nombuf = dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed;
+ stats->rx_nombuf += dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed;
return 0;
}