> On 17 Nov 2017, at 05:39, Claudio Jeker <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 03:21:20PM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 01:29:42PM +1000, David Gwynne wrote: >>> im adding numbers to input and output qdrops in the kernel, so im >>> aware that they exist now. however, i don't really see these values >>> in userland. it seems netstat and systat think errors are more >>> important. >>> >>> i tried adding qdrops to the ifstat view, but it got too cluttered. >>> so i made a new view called iqdrops that shows qdrops instead of >>> errors. i used iqdrops instead of ifqdrops so "if" on its own is >>> still not ambiguous. >> >> Now ifstat and iqdrops show almost the same information. Just two >> commns are different, eight culumns are redundant. I think one >> page would be better. Do we need DESC? It takes a lot of space >> that could be used for output of dynamic counters.
can we have modified displays within a view? kind of like how some views change their ordering. i agree that everything should be on the ifstat page, but there really isnt enough space. if we can have tweaked displays, id like the main one to aggregate the qdrops and errs values into a single column, and then have separate displays within that view to show errors and drops as separate values. > Would it make sense to extend the mbuf page instead? It has the ring size > and so it may make sense to show drops there. i dont think that would make sense for interfaces like vlan.
