Re: [PATCH net-next 10/19] net: hns: bugfix about pfc pause frame statistics

在 2016/6/22 17:41, Andy Shevchenko 写道:

On Wed, 2016-06-22 at 09:43 +0800, Yisen Zhuang wrote:

quoted

在 2016/6/21 18:32, Andy Shevchenko 写道:

quoted

On Tue, 2016-06-21 at 11:56 +0800, Yisen Zhuang wrote:

quoted

From: Daode Huang <redacted>

For SoC hip06, PFC pause handled in dsaf, while hip05 in XGMAC,
so change the statistics of pfc pause in dsaf and remove the old
pfc pause frame statistics.

quoted

+static char *hns_dsaf_get_node_stats_strings(char *data, int
node,
+					     struct dsaf_device
*dsaf_dev)
 {
 	char *buff = data;
+	int i;
+	bool is_ver1 = AE_IS_VER1(dsaf_dev->dsaf_ver);
 
 	snprintf(buff, ETH_GSTRING_LEN, "innod%d_pad_drop_pkts",
node);
 	buff = buff + ETH_GSTRING_LEN;

@@ -2502,6 +2530,18 @@ static char

*hns_dsaf_get_node_stats_strings(char *data, int node)
 	buff = buff + ETH_GSTRING_LEN;
 	snprintf(buff, ETH_GSTRING_LEN, "innod%d_stp_drop_pkts",
node);
 	buff = buff + ETH_GSTRING_LEN;
+	if ((node < DSAF_SERVICE_NW_NUM) && (!is_ver1)) {

Redundant parens.

quoted

+		for (i = 0; i < DSAF_PRIO_NR; i++) {
+			snprintf(buff, ETH_GSTRING_LEN,
+				 "inod%d_pfc_prio%d_pkts", node,
i);
+			buff = buff + ETH_GSTRING_LEN;

buff += ...

quoted

+		}
+		for (i = 0; i < DSAF_PRIO_NR; i++) {
+			snprintf(buff, ETH_GSTRING_LEN,
+				 "onod%d_pfc_prio%d_pkts", node,
i);
+			buff = buff + ETH_GSTRING_LEN;

Ditto.

quoted

 {
 	u64 *p = data;
+	int i;
 	struct dsaf_hw_stats *hw_stats = &ddev-

quoted

hw_stats[node_num];

+	bool is_ver1 = AE_IS_VER1(ddev->dsaf_ver);
 
 	p[0] = hw_stats->pad_drop;
 	p[1] = hw_stats->man_pkts;

@@ -2527,8 +2569,16 @@ static u64 *hns_dsaf_get_node_stats(struct

dsaf_device *ddev, u64 *data,
 	p[10] = hw_stats->local_addr_false;
 	p[11] = hw_stats->vlan_drop;
 	p[12] = hw_stats->stp_drop;
-	p[13] = hw_stats->tx_pkts;
+	if ((node_num < DSAF_SERVICE_NW_NUM) && (!is_ver1)) {
+		for (i = 0; i < DSAF_PRIO_NR; i++) {
+			p[13 + i] = hw_stats->rx_pfc[i];
+			p[13 + i + DSAF_PRIO_NR] = hw_stats-

quoted

tx_pfc[i];

+		}

Two different approaches how to assign data. Above uses 2 for-loops,
here you put everything to one.

Above cann't be merged to 1 for-loop, because lenght of the string is
unknowable.

It doesn't matter since you are incrementing start position by
constant. 

snprintf(buff, ETH_GSTRING_LEN, "inod%d_pfc_prio%d_pkts", node, i);
snprintf(buff, ETH_GSTRING_LEN, "onod%d_pfc_prio%d_pkts", node, i);

Same approach as below can be used

snprintf(buff + 0 * ETH_GSTRING_LEN * DSAF_PRIO_NR, ETH_GSTRING_LEN, ...
snprintf(buff + 1 * ETH_GSTRING_LEN * DSAF_PRIO_NR, ETH_GSTRING_LEN, ...

Of course to make it less verbose you may add new definition(s) and/ or
variable(s).

quoted

And here we put everything to one to reduce codes.

I would suggest to use following pattern for such lines
p[13 + i + 0 * DSAF_PRIO_NR] = hw_stats->rx_pfc[i];
p[13 + i + 1 * DSAF_PRIO_NR] = hw_stats->tx_pfc[i];

That's allow reader to see what are you doing here.

P.S. This is for the future patches since current is already applied.

Hi Andy,

Many thanks for you suggestions. I will fix it with a new patch.

Thanks,

Yisen