On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 5:28 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim <j...@mojatatu.com> wrote: > On 16-06-19 11:14 PM, Roopa Prabhu wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Florian Fainelli <f.faine...@gmail.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?
for us the standard netlink api that returns netdev stats includes all stats hw and sw. When i say hw and sw, I mean some of the error counters can also include errors counted by sw. ethtool stats has always provided drivers/users with additional stats that the hw or driver can expose. > Yes, it would be more accurate to provide aggregated stats but > it may break backward compat if expectation is both are read > separately today. I don't think people see netdev stats as sw and ethtool as hw stats. The latter just provides more granularity for debugging. Thats the way i have looked at it forever. > 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. > I don't think existing stat implies s/ware stats only. so, I think we should be careful about changing the meaning of existing stats. logical devices like bridge stats have always been software only...but with switchdev the way we see these or implement these is to also include hardware stats when they are hw offloaded. For us bridge vlan stats, vxlan stats and so on will follow the same model. You cannot introduce separate sw and hw stats for these. All stats will have to follow a consistent model. Thanks, Roopa
