[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5767E16F.2040902@mojatatu.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 08:28:31 -0400
From: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To: Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Nogah Frankel <nogahf@...lanox.com>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>,
Elad Raz <eladr@...lanox.com>,
Yotam Gigi <yotamg@...lanox.com>,
Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>,
John Linville <linville@...driver.com>,
Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>,
Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com>,
Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...il.com>, sd@...asysnail.net,
eranbe@...lanox.com, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"hannes@...essinduktion.org" <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v4 0/4] return offloaded stats as default and
expose original sw stats
On 16-06-19 11:14 PM, Roopa Prabhu wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> wrote:
>
> I have also mentioned this before, the default api must provide
> accumulated (hw and sw) stats...,
> because this is the api that the user queries on an interface.
Sorry - I missed those discussions.
What is current practise? Do people request for one via ip link
stats and the other via ethtool?
What do you guys do in your implementation?
Yes, it would be more accurate to provide aggregated stats but
it may break backward compat if expectation is both are read
separately today.
Maybe it makes sense to have a brand new TLV for these aggregated
stats as Jiri was suggesting.That means two new TLVs not one.
1) TLV for aggregated stats - which cant be current one
2) TLV for h/w stats
The existing stat implies s/ware only.
cheers,
jamal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists