On 31/12/13 5:50 AM, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
On 31 December 2013 09:46, Brad Smith <b...@comstyle.com> wrote:
On 31/12/13 3:14 AM, Mark Kettenis wrote:
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2013 01:28:04 -0500
From: Brad Smith <b...@comstyle.com>
Don't count RX overruns and missed packets as inputs errors. They're
expected to increment when using MCLGETI.
OK?
These may be "expected", but they're still packets that were not
received. And it is useful to know about these, for example when
debugging TCP performance issues.
Well do we want to keep just the missed packets or both? Part of the
diff was inspired by this commit when I was looking at what counters
were incrementing..
for bge(4)..
revision 1.334
date: 2013/06/06 00:05:30; author: dlg; state: Exp; lines: +2 -4;
dont count rx ring overruns as input errors. with MCLGETI controlling the
ring we expect to run out of rx descriptors as a matter of course, its not
an error.
ok mikeb@
it does screws up statistics big time. does mpc counter follow rx_overruns?
why did we add them up both previously?
.e.g.
em0: Missed Packets = 1925
em0: RX overruns = 267
em0: Good Packets Rcvd = 22279749
this already wasn't being counted but for reference..
em0: Receive No Buffers = 24382
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
