On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 04:29:36PM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote: > On 28.06.2019 16:17, Flavio Leitner wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 03:21:07PM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote: > >> On 27.06.2019 14:12, Kevin Traynor wrote: > >>> vhost tx retries may occur, and it can be a sign that > >>> the guest is not optimally configured. > >>> > >>> Add some stats so a user will know if vhost tx retries are > >>> occurring and hence give a hint that guest config should be > >>> examined. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Kevin Traynor <[email protected]> > >>> Acked-by: Flavio Leitner <[email protected]> > >>> Acked-by: Eelco Chaudron <[email protected]> > >>> --- > >>> Documentation/topics/dpdk/vhost-user.rst | 5 +++++ > >>> include/openvswitch/netdev.h | 1 + > >>> lib/netdev-dpdk.c | 7 +++++-- > >>> vswitchd/bridge.c | 3 ++- > >>> 4 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/Documentation/topics/dpdk/vhost-user.rst > >>> b/Documentation/topics/dpdk/vhost-user.rst > >>> index 1dd02b8b6..3caa88231 100644 > >>> --- a/Documentation/topics/dpdk/vhost-user.rst > >>> +++ b/Documentation/topics/dpdk/vhost-user.rst > >>> @@ -112,4 +112,9 @@ The guest should also have sufficient cores dedicated > >>> for consuming and > >>> processing packets at the required rate. > >>> > >>> +The amount of Tx retries on a vhost-user or vhost-user-client interface > >>> can be > >>> +shown with:: > >>> + > >>> + ovs-vsctl get Interface dpdkvhostclient0 statistics:tx_retries > >>> + > >>> .. _dpdk-vhost-user: > >>> > >>> diff --git a/include/openvswitch/netdev.h b/include/openvswitch/netdev.h > >>> index 0c10f7b48..4d18b9f66 100644 > >>> --- a/include/openvswitch/netdev.h > >>> +++ b/include/openvswitch/netdev.h > >>> @@ -46,4 +46,5 @@ struct netdev_stats { > >>> uint64_t multicast; /* Multicast packets received. */ > >>> uint64_t collisions; > >>> + uint64_t tx_retries; /* Retries when unable to transmit.*/ > >> > >> > >> This seems very vhost specific counter. > >> Maybe it's better to report it in custom_stats? > > > > I thought we could implement retry for nics and rings if we want to > > not drop any packets. Not sure if it will ever be implemented > > though. > > For HW NICs, I think, it's unlikely that we'll push packets faster than > HW will send them. For ring ports it makes more sense, but do you know > if anyone uses them? Since ivshmem deprecation this functionality looks > not very interesting. I don't know if anyone uses ring ports at all.
Things might change when we mix with HWOL, but it's hard to tell today. > Anyway, with custom stats where will be no difference for the user. > The only difference is in OVS code. At least, there is no re-try > functionality for system interfaces in both datapaths. Just wanted to point out that possibility, but that's not the case today so I have no strong opinion either way. fbl _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
