[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200217130515.GE32734@lunn.ch>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 14:05:15 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
Cc: Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo.bianconi@...hat.com>,
Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org, davem@...emloft.net,
David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
BPF-dev-list <bpf@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 4/5] net: mvneta: introduce xdp counters to
ethtool
On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 11:32:09AM +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 11:25:50 +0100
> Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo.bianconi@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Sun, 16 Feb 2020 22:07:32 +0100
> > > Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > @@ -2033,6 +2050,7 @@ mvneta_xdp_submit_frame(struct mvneta_port *pp, struct mvneta_tx_queue *txq,
> > > > u64_stats_update_begin(&stats->syncp);
> > > > stats->es.ps.tx_bytes += xdpf->len;
> > > > stats->es.ps.tx_packets++;
> > > > + stats->es.ps.xdp_tx++;
> > > > u64_stats_update_end(&stats->syncp);
> > >
> > > I find it confusing that this ethtool stats is named "xdp_tx".
> > > Because you use it as an "xmit" counter and not for the action XDP_TX.
> > >
> > > Both XDP_TX and XDP_REDIRECT out this device will increment this
> > > "xdp_tx" counter. I don't think end-users will comprehend this...
> > >
> > > What about naming it "xdp_xmit" ?
> >
> > Hi Jesper,
> >
> > yes, I think it is definitely better. So to follow up:
> > - rename current "xdp_tx" counter in "xdp_xmit" and increment it for
> > XDP_TX verdict and for ndo_xdp_xmit
> > - introduce a new "xdp_tx" counter only for XDP_TX verdict.
> >
> > If we agree I can post a follow-up patch.
>
> I agree, that sounds like an improvement to this patchset.
>
>
> I suspect David Ahern have some opinions about more general stats for
> XDP, but that it is a more general discussion, that it outside this
> patchset, but we should also have that discussion.
Hi Jesper
I've not been following XDP too much, but xdp_xmit seems pretty
generic. It would be nice if all drivers used the same statistics
names. Less user confusion that way. So why is this outside of the
discussion?
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists