On 14/06/2018 11:55, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
On 6/14/2018 7:39 AM, Remy Horton wrote:
On 13/06/2018 16:39, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
On 6/7/2018 9:15 AM, David Marchand wrote:
Testpmd should not expect the xstats names and values arrays to be
aligned: neither the arrays sizes, nor the order in which the values are.
[..]
APIs exist for getting subset of values (.._by_id) but they both assume
requested ids are array index.
As you said this works fine because of xstats[idx].id==idx
Changing that coincidence into an assumption looks like a bug to me.
struct rte_eth_xstat_name { char name[]; }
struct rte_eth_xstat { uint64_t id; uint64_t value; }
These two structs are for basic key-value match.
But one has the "id" field, but other doesn't. If we use "id" as match, this
will be the index of xstat_name[]. This is extra complexity, and xstats is
already unnecessarily complex.
I am for documenting that "xstat_name" and "xstat" are aligned, both in size and
order, and array indexes are ids, clearly in API doc and continue with existing
implementation. What do you think?
As long as none of the PMD vendors intend to take advantage of
xstats[idx].id!=idx (e.g. to allow omitted values) then I'm OK with it.
..Remy
