[Top] [All Lists]

Re: RFC: per-socket statistics on received/dropped packets

To: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: RFC: per-socket statistics on received/dropped packets
From: Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 08 Jun 2002 17:13:35 -0700
Cc: mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, cfriesen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Organization: Candela Technologies
References: <20020606.202108.52904668.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <3D01307C.4090503@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20020608170511.B26821@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20020608.160407.101346167.davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2

David S. Miller wrote:

You guys we have SNMP statistics for these events, there
is no reason to have them per-socket.  You cannot convince
me that when you are diagnosing a problem the SNMP stats
are not enough to show you if the packets are being dropped.

So, I will not attempt to convince you that you need per-socket
counters.  I do know for absolute certain that I would like to
have them (I write a traffic-generation & testing program).

For instance, when I run 50Mbps bi-directional on a P-4 1.6Ghz machine,
using a single port of a DFE-570tx NIC, then I drop around .2% of
the packets, in bursts.  I have kernel buffers very large (2MB),
and the CPU is not maxed out.

With the current system, it is difficult for me to know exactly what
I need to change to get better performance and/or if better performance
is even possible.

If not, this means we need to add more SNMP events, that is
all it means.

If you're talking per-socket SNMP counters, then that could work.
General protocol-wide counters would not help much, at least
in my case.


Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>       <Ben_Greear AT>
President of Candela Technologies Inc

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>