Re: [RFC PATCH net] net/core: don't increment rx_dropped on inactive slaves

[Jiri Pirko]

Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 08:11:22PM CET, jarod@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>The network core tries to keep track of dropped packets, but some packets
>you wouldn't really call dropped, so much as intentionally ignored, under
>certain circumstances. One such case is that of bonding and team device
>slaves that are currently inactive. Their respective rx_handler functions
>return RX_HANDLER_EXACT (the only places in the kernel that return that),
>which ends up tracking into the network core's __netif_receive_skb_core()
>function's drop path, with no pt_prev set. On a noisy network, this can
>result in a very rapidly incrementing rx_dropped counter, not only on the
>inactive slave(s), but also on the master device, such as the following:
>
>Inter-|   Receive                                                |  Transmit
> face |bytes    packets errs drop fifo frame compressed multicast|bytes    packets errs drop fifo colls carrier compressed
>  p7p1: 14783346  140430    0 140428    0     0          0      2040      680       8    0    0    0     0       0          0
>  p7p2: 14805198  140648    0    0    0     0          0      2034        0       0    0    0    0     0       0          0
> bond0: 53365248  532798    0 421160    0     0          0    115151     2040      24    0    0    0     0       0          0
>    lo:    5420      54    0    0    0     0          0         0     5420      54    0    0    0     0       0          0
>  p5p1: 19292195  196197    0 140368    0     0          0     56564      680       8    0    0    0     0       0          0
>  p5p2: 19289707  196171    0 140364    0     0          0     56547      680       8    0    0    0     0       0          0
>   em3: 20996626  158214    0    0    0     0          0       383        0       0    0    0    0     0       0          0
>   em2: 14065122  138462    0    0    0     0          0       310        0       0    0    0    0     0       0          0
>   em1: 14063162  138440    0    0    0     0          0       308        0       0    0    0    0     0       0          0
>   em4: 21050830  158729    0    0    0     0          0       385    71662     469    0    0    0     0       0          0
>   ib0:       0       0    0    0    0     0          0         0        0       0    0    0    0     0       0          0
>
>In this scenario, p5p1, p5p2 and p7p1 are all inactive slaves in an
>active-backup bond0, and you can see that all three have high drop counts,
>with the master bond0 showing a tally of all three.
>
>I know that this was previously discussed some here:
>
>    http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg226341.html
>
>It seems additional counters never came to fruition, but honestly, for
>this particular case, I'm not even sure they're warranted, I'd be inclined
>to say just silently drop these packets without incrementing a counter. At
>least, that's probably what would make someone who has complained loudly
>about this issue happy, as they have monitoring tools that are squaking
>loudly at any increments to rx_dropped.
>
>CC: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>CC: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx>
>CC: Jiri Pirko <jiri@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>CC: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>CC: Tom Herbert <tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>CC: Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@xxxxxxxxx>
>CC: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@xxxxxxxxx>
>CC: Andy Gospodarek <gospo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>CC: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Signed-off-by: Jarod Wilson <jarod@xxxxxxxxxx>

Acked-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

I think this should be considered as a bug and go to -net.