RE: [net-next 3/8] i40e: driver ethtool core

From: Ben Hutchings [mailto:bhutchings@solarflare.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 12:59 PM

On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 19:47 +0000, Nelson, Shannon wrote:

quoted

quoted

From: Ben Hutchings [mailto:bhutchings@solarflare.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 11:27 AM

On Thu, 2013-06-13 at 20:55 -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote:

quoted

From: Jesse Brandeburg <redacted>

[...]

quoted

quoted

quoted

+static struct i40e_stats i40e_gstrings_stats[] = {
+	I40E_PF_STAT("rx_bytes", stats.eth.rx_bytes),
+	I40E_PF_STAT("tx_bytes", stats.eth.tx_bytes),
+	I40E_PF_STAT("rx_errors", stats.eth.rx_errors),
+	I40E_PF_STAT("tx_errors", stats.eth.tx_errors),

Duplicates.

Well, not really are they duplicates - the NETDEV_STAT numbers are
specifically for each netdev that is attached to this device.  Because
the XL710 supports VMDq, SR-IOV, and some other device multiplexing
schemes, each netdev's NETDEV_STAT struct is the subset of the traffic
going through its portion of the device.

The PF_STAT struct holds the stats for what actually goes through the
physical port.  This is not necessarily a summation of the various
NETDEV_STAT structs, because some connections may be talking to each
other and not out the physical port.

When ethtool -S is called on the PF's netdev, we see both the netdev
and the ports stats printed.  When called on non-PF connection we only
see the netdev stats, none of the port stats.

Good point.  And this is something I've been meaning to bring up for
discussion on netdev myself - we should have some naming convention to
distinguish per-port and per-function/per-netdev statistics.

If you've got some ideas on a convention to use, we'd be happy to set the precedent.

sln