On Tue, 22 Aug 2017 22:55:55 -0400 David Harton <dhar...@cisco.com> wrote:
> rte_eth_stats_get() unconditonally would set rx_nombuf > even if the device was setting the value. A check has > been added in rte_eth_stats_get() to leave the device > value in-tact when non-zero. > > Signed-off-by: David Harton <dhar...@cisco.com> > --- > > v2: Fixed braces complaint required by other coding standards. > > lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c | 5 ++++- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c > index 0597641..0a1d3b8 100644 > --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c > +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c > @@ -1336,8 +1336,11 @@ struct rte_eth_dev * > memset(stats, 0, sizeof(*stats)); > > RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(*dev->dev_ops->stats_get, -ENOTSUP); > - stats->rx_nombuf = dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed; > (*dev->dev_ops->stats_get)(dev, stats); > + /* only set rx_nombuf if not set by the device */ > + if (!stats->rx_nombuf) > + stats->rx_nombuf = dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed; > + > return 0; > } > This seems backwards. It seems like the original way worked fine. If device specific code wanted to override rx_nombuf it could do so either by adding it's additional value or just setting rx_nombuf. Adding special cases seems like it would start a bad precedent and the could would end up quite complex as some values had one semantic and others were only from driver.
