On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 19:07:59 +0100 Vadim Fedorenko wrote:
> On 29/07/2025 18:31, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> >> The only one bin will have negative value is the one to signal the end
> >> of the list of the bins, which is not actually put into netlink message.
> >> It actually better to change spec to have unsigned values, I believe.
> >
> > Can any of these NICs send runt packets? Can any send packets without
> > an ethernet header and FCS?
> >
> > Seems to me, the bin (0,0) is meaningless, so can could be considered
> > the end marker. You then have unsigned everywhere, keeping it KISS.
>
> I had to revisit the 802.3df-2024, and it looks like you are right:
> "FEC_codeword_error_bin_i, where i=1 to 15, are optional 32-bit
> counters. While align_status is true, for each codeword received with
> exactly i correctable 10-bit symbols"
>
> That means bin (0,0) doesn't exist according to standard, so we can use
> it as a marker even though some vendors provide this bin as part of
> histogram.
IDK, 0,0 means all symbols were completely correct.
It may be useful for calculating bit error rate?
A workaround for having the {-1, -1} sentinel could also be to skip
the first entry:
if (i && !ranges[i].low && !ranges[i].high)
break;
