> On Jun 6, 2019, at 2:46 PM, Stephen Hemminger <step...@networkplumber.org> > wrote: > > On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 21:13:50 +0000 > "Patel, Vedang" <vedang.pa...@intel.com> wrote: > >>> On Jun 6, 2019, at 12:43 PM, Stephen Hemminger <step...@networkplumber.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 10:52:18 -0700 >>> Vedang Patel <vedang.pa...@intel.com> wrote: >>> >>>> @@ -405,6 +420,7 @@ static int taprio_print_opt(struct qdisc_util *qu, >>>> FILE *f, struct rtattr *opt) >>>> struct rtattr *tb[TCA_TAPRIO_ATTR_MAX + 1]; >>>> struct tc_mqprio_qopt *qopt = 0; >>>> __s32 clockid = CLOCKID_INVALID; >>>> + __u32 offload_flags = 0; >>>> int i; >>>> >>>> if (opt == NULL) >>>> @@ -442,6 +458,11 @@ static int taprio_print_opt(struct qdisc_util *qu, >>>> FILE *f, struct rtattr *opt) >>>> >>>> print_string(PRINT_ANY, "clockid", "clockid %s", >>>> get_clock_name(clockid)); >>>> >>>> + if (tb[TCA_TAPRIO_ATTR_OFFLOAD_FLAGS]) >>>> + offload_flags = >>>> rta_getattr_u32(tb[TCA_TAPRIO_ATTR_OFFLOAD_FLAGS]); >>>> + >>>> + print_uint(PRINT_ANY, "offload", " offload %x", offload_flags); >>> >>> I don't think offload flags should be printed at all if not present. >>> >>> Why not? >> Will make this in the next version. > > Mostly this is so that output doesn't change for users who aren't using > offload or have old kernel. Yes, I agree with that. But, this change alone won’t be enough. There is a minor kernel change also required which will not send the parameters if they are not set. I will include that change in the next version of my kernel patches.
Iproute2 patches incoming momentarily. This is the v2 which I was supposed to send out. Thanks, Vedang
