On 6/27/2017 12:21 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 12:08:56PM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote: >> 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? >> > > For 2, does the "use existing methods" include calling xstats? If so, > then we can just drop the requirement for 2 to have any new functions > implemented in the driver. Instead, have the information provided by > drivers in the normal xstats call, but have a new ethdev API to provide > that information to the app - basically hiding the xstats complexity > underneath.
I was thinking another dev_ops similar to xstats, but re-using xstats can be better idea here. so option 2 becomes: [2] An eth_dev API to use existing APIs to get information from PMDs and wrap MIBs related xstats calls. But I believe if option 2 is overkill for this task question is still valid. Thanks, ferruh
