On 6/26/2017 10:42 AM, Radu Nicolau wrote: > From: Michal Jastrzebski <michalx.k.jastrzeb...@intel.com> > > If-MIB xstats: > ifNumber > ifIndex > ifType > ifMtu > ifSpeed > ifPhysAddress > ifOperStatus > ifLastChange > ifHighSpeed > ifConnectorPresent > ifCounterDiscontinuityTime > > EtherLike-MIB xstats: > dot3PauseOperMode > dot3StatsDuplexStatus > dot3StatsRateControlAbility > dot3StatsRateControlStatus > dot3ControlFunctionsSupported > > -updated in v2: coding style > > Signed-off-by: Piotr Azarewicz <piotrx.t.azarew...@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Michal Jastrzebski <michalx.k.jastrzeb...@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Radu Nicolau <radu.nico...@intel.com>
<...> This patch implements MIBs for some Intel drivers using xstats, this is easy way to get some information from PMDs. But there was a outstanding comment to make this ethdev layer. So I believe we have two options: [1] Each PMD implements MIBs using xstats, this is pragmatic solution and each PMD can implement whichever MIBs they want. [2] Implement a ethdev layer API and add a new dev_ops to get MIBs, API can use existing methods to get required information, and if it fails can call dev_ops which can be similar to the xstats. Because of API all PMDs can have a small amount of support by default and they can implement dev_ops for more support. Although 2) looks more generic and proper, I am not really sure if that is overkill and if this worth to the effort and to have new API and dev_ops, comparing current method is easy to implement, any comments? Thanks, ferruh
