Re: Future Direction for rte_eth_stats_get()

From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
Sent: Friday, January 22, 2016 2:44 PM
To: Tahhan, Maryam <redacted>; David Harton
(dharton) [off-list ref]
Cc: dev@dpdk.org; olivier.matz@6wind.com; Van Haaren, Harry
[off-list ref]
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Future Direction for rte_eth_stats_get()

2016-01-22 14:18, Tahhan, Maryam:

quoted

So what can be enabled again in struct rte_eth_stats  from what was

already there is the equivalent of:

quoted

* rx_length_errors
* rx_crc_errors
* rx_missed_errors - the deprecation notice was removed for this

field.

quoted

* multicast

What should be added in to distinguish between errors and drops.

struct rte_eth_stats :

quoted

 * rx_errors
 * tx_errors

As for the detailed rx errors and tx errors I'm open to feedback from

you folks as to what should go in and what is too detailed. These
weren't in struct rte_eth_stats previously, they are available through
xstats and are uniformly named across the drivers. Oliver + Harry any
thoughts?

quoted

David I assume you are looking for all the missing fields to be added?

They are not missing. They just not exactly match ones having a long
history in Linux kernel.
Please let's avoid to blindly mimic others without thinking about
modern needs.

My bad wording - I apologise, but I agree we should consider what makes sense and what doesn't.

quoted

quoted

quoted

From: David Harton

quoted

Is there a reason the stats have been deprecated?  Why not

keep

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

the stats in line with the standard linux practices such as
rtnl_link_stats64?