Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] can: do not increase rx statistics when receiving
 CAN error frames
To:     Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>,
        Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
        linux-can@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev,
        Jimmy Assarsson <extja@kvaser.com>,
        Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@microchip.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
        Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@microchip.com>,
        Chandrasekar Ramakrishnan <rcsekar@samsung.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>,
        Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>,
        Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>,
        Appana Durga Kedareswara rao <appana.durga.rao@xilinx.com>,
        Naga Sureshkumar Relli <naga.sureshkumar.relli@xilinx.com>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>,
        Stephane Grosjean <s.grosjean@peak-system.com>
References: <20211123115333.624335-1-mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
 <20211123115333.624335-2-mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
From:   Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
Message-ID: <aafec053-1054-4797-e1f1-e89586fe326f@hartkopp.net>
Date:   Tue, 23 Nov 2021 22:01:04 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20211123115333.624335-2-mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 23.11.21 12:53, Vincent Mailhol wrote:
> CAN error skb is an interface specific to socket CAN. The CAN error
> skb does not correspond to any actual CAN frame sent on the wire. Only
> an error flag and a delimiter are transmitted when an error occurs
> (c.f. ISO 11898-1 section 10.4.4.2 "Error flag").
> 
> For this reason, it makes no sense to increment the rx_packets and
> rx_bytes fields of struct net_device_stats because no actual payload
> were transmitted on the wire.
> 

(..)

> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/dev/rx-offload.c b/drivers/net/can/dev/rx-offload.c
> index 37b0cc65237b..bb47e9a49240 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/can/dev/rx-offload.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/can/dev/rx-offload.c
> @@ -54,8 +54,10 @@ static int can_rx_offload_napi_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int quota)
>   		struct can_frame *cf = (struct can_frame *)skb->data;
>   
>   		work_done++;
> -		stats->rx_packets++;
> -		stats->rx_bytes += cf->len;
> +		if (!(cf->can_id & CAN_ERR_MASK)) {

This looks wrong.

Did you think of CAN_ERR_FLAG ??


> +			stats->rx_packets++;
> +			stats->rx_bytes += cf->len;
> +		}
>   		netif_receive_skb(skb);

(..)

> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/usb/ucan.c b/drivers/net/can/usb/ucan.c
> index 1679cbe45ded..d582c39fc8d0 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/can/usb/ucan.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/can/usb/ucan.c
> @@ -621,8 +621,10 @@ static void ucan_rx_can_msg(struct ucan_priv *up, struct ucan_message_in *m)
>   		memcpy(cf->data, m->msg.can_msg.data, cf->len);
>   
>   	/* don't count error frames as real packets */
> -	stats->rx_packets++;
> -	stats->rx_bytes += cf->len;
> +	if (!(cf->can_id & CAN_ERR_FLAG)) {

Ah, here we are :-)

> +		stats->rx_packets++;
> +		stats->rx_bytes += cf->len;
> +	}