On Tue, 1 Jun 2021 11:14:36 -0700 Jesse Brandeburg wrote: > > 3. ethool(netlink with cqe mode) + kernel with cqe mode: > > estuary:/$ ethtool -c eth0 > > Coalesce parameters for eth0: > > Adaptive RX: on TX: on > > stats-block-usecs: n/a > > sample-interval: n/a > > pkt-rate-low: n/a > > pkt-rate-high: n/a > > > > rx-usecs: 20 > > rx-frames: 0 > > rx-usecs-irq: n/a > > rx-frames-irq: n/a > > > > tx-usecs: 20 > > tx-frames: 0 > > tx-usecs-irq: n/a > > tx-frames-irq: n/a > > > > rx-usecs-low: n/a > > rx-frame-low: n/a > > tx-usecs-low: n/a > > tx-frame-low: n/a > > > > rx-usecs-high: 0 > > rx-frame-high: n/a > > tx-usecs-high: 0 > > tx-frame-high: n/a > > > > CQE mode RX: off TX: off > > BTW, thanks for working on something like this. > I hope it's not just me, but I don't like the display of the new CQE > line, at the very least, it's not consistent with what is there already > in the output of this command, and at worst, it surprises the user and > makes it hard to parse for any scripting tools. Tools should parse JSON output ;) > Can I suggest something like: > > rx-cqe: off > tx-cqe: off > rx-eqe: off > tx-eqe: off > > Then, if hardware is in EQE mode it is clear that it's supported and > ON/OFF, as well as for CQE mode. This is how "Adaptive" is displayed, maybe we should move the line up so that it's closer to its inspiration? Having cqe/eqe both listed when only one can be "on" may not be 100% intuitive either (assuming my understanding that this feature is just about restarting the timer on new packet arrival is correct).
