From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/9] ethdev: remove HW specific stats in
 stats structs
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 15:44:32 +0200
Message-ID: <55D48840.6070403@6wind.com>
References: <1436965894-130019-1-git-send-email-maryam.tahhan@intel.com>
 <1436965894-130019-5-git-send-email-maryam.tahhan@intel.com>
 <55D1F57A.8090408@6wind.com>
 <1A27633A6DA49C4A92FCD5D4312DBF536A4E5720@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: "Tahhan, Maryam" <maryam.tahhan@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f171.google.com (mail-wi0-f171.google.com
 [209.85.212.171]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0076B8D9B
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 15:44:46 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by wicja10 with SMTP id ja10so8888118wic.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 19 Aug 2015 06:44:46 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1A27633A6DA49C4A92FCD5D4312DBF536A4E5720@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

Hi Maryam,

On 08/19/2015 02:53 PM, Tahhan, Maryam wrote:
>> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com]
>> Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 3:54 PM
>> To: Tahhan, Maryam; dev@dpdk.org
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 4/9] ethdev: remove HW specific stats in
>> stats structs
>>
>> Hi Maryam,
>>
>> On 07/15/2015 03:11 PM, Maryam Tahhan wrote:
>>> Remove non generic stats in rte_stats_strings and mark the relevant
>>> fields in struct rte_eth_stats as deprecated.
>>>
>>
>> Looking again at this patch, I'm wondering if "imissed" should be kept instead
>> of beeing deprecated. I think it could be useful to differentiate ierrors from
>> imissed, and it's not a hw-specific statistic. What do you think?
>>
>> One more comment: it seems these fields are marked as deprecated but they
>> are still used on other drivers (e1000, i40e, ...).
>>
>> Regards,
>> Olivier
>>
>
>
> Hi Olivier
> I can remove the deprecated status for imissed to leave the differentiation between errors and missed packets.
> igb and i40e will be updated soon to reflect this. I marked them as deprecated to deter their use in the future. Older instances/use will need to be resolved.

 From my point of view, yes, I think it's better to keep different stats
for imissed and ierrors as it can be useful to determinine the cause of
packet losses. If nobody disagrees, I think we could remove the
deprecation notice for imissed.

Regards,
Olivier