Re: [PATCH 3/3] bject: IB Core: Display extended counter set if available

[Hal Rosenstock <hal-LDSdmyG8hGV8YrgS2mwiifqBs+8SCbDb@public.gmane.org>]

On 12/18/2015 8:39 AM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2015, Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> 
>>> +	if (cpi.capability_mask && IB_PMA_CLASS_CAP_EXT_WIDTH) {
>>> +		/* We have extended counters */
>>> +
>>> +		if (cpi.capability_mask && IB_PMA_CLASS_CAP_EXT_WIDTH_NOIETF)
>>> +			/* But not the IETF ones */
>>> +			return &pma_group_noietf;
>>
>> These 2 capability bits are mutually exclusive so I think it should be:
>>
>> 	if (cpi.capability_mask && IB_PMA_CLASS_CAP_EXT_WIDTH) {
>> 		/* We have extended counters */
>> 		return &pma_group_ext;
>>   	}
>>
>> 	if (cpi.capability_mask && IB_PMA_CLASS_CAP_EXT_WIDTH_NOIETF)
>> 		/* But not the IETF ones */
>> 		return &pma_group_noietf;
> 
> This case would then use the 64 bit counters despite of the
> IB_PMA_CLASS_CAP_EXT_WIDTH not being set.

Yes, IB_PMA_CLASS_CAP_EXT_WIDTH means all extended counters including
IETF ones whereas IB_PMA_CLASS_CAP_EXT_WIDTH_NOIETF means extended
counters without IETF ones ([uni multi]cast [rcv xmit] pkts).

> 
>> 	}
>>
>> 	return &pma_group;
>>
>>> +
> 
> The tables contain all the counters each. So we would need another table
> of counters that has the ietf counters but not the 64 bit extended ones?

I'm not following what you mean. I thought pma_group_noietf and
pma_group_ext take care of the 2 different options for extended counters
(with the error counters needed from the mandatory PortCounters) and
pma_group is when neither of the extended counter capabilities is
indicated.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html