On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 04:28:44PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 02:10:05 +0200 Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 04:02:13PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > For a while now we have been pushing back on stats which have a proper > > > interface to be added to ethtool -S. So I'd expect the list of stats > > > exposed via ethtool will end up being shorter than in this patch. > > > > Hmm, not sure if that's ever going to be the case. Even with drivers > > that are going to expose standardized forms of counters, I'm not sure > > it's going to be nice to remove them from ethtool -S. > > Not remove, but also not accept adding them to new drivers. > > > Testing teams all > > over the world have scripts that grep for those. Unfortunately I think > > ethtool -S will always remain a dumping ground of hell, and the place > > where you search for a counter based on its name from the hardware block > > guide as opposed to its standardized name/function. And that might mean > > there's no reason to not accept Oleksij's patch right away. Even if he > > might volunteer to actually follow up with a patch where he exposes the > > .ndo_get_stats64 from DSA towards drivers, as well as implements > > .ndo_has_offload_stats and .ndo_get_offload_stats within DSA, that will > > most likely be done as separate patches to this one, and not change in > > any way how this patch looks. Ok, so what is the plan for me? Implement .ndo_get_stats64 before this one? Regards, Oleksij -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
