Re: [dpdk-dev] Future Direction for rte_eth_stats_get()

["Tahhan, Maryam" <maryam.tahhan@intel.com>]

Hi David
Some of the stats were HW specific rather than generic stats that should be exposed through rte_eth_stats and were migrated to the xstats API. http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-June/019915.html. The naming was also not generic enough to cover some of the drivers and in some cases what was exposed was only a partial view of the relevant stats.

They were marked as deprecated to deter people from using them in the future, but haven't been removed from all the driver implementations yet. The Registers that remain undeprecated are those considered to be generic.

Which registers are you particularly interested in that have been deprecated? Can you elaborate on what you mean by " scenarios where a static view is expected "

Thanks in advance.

Best Regards, 
Maryam


> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of David Harton
> (dharton)
> Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 5:19 PM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Future Direction for rte_eth_stats_get()
> 
> I see that some of the rte_eth_stats have been marked deprecated in 2.2
> that are returned by rte_eth_stats_get().  Applications that utilize any
> number of device types rely on functions like this one to debug I/O
> issues.
> 
> Is there a reason the stats have been deprecated?  Why not keep the
> stats in line with the standard linux practices such as rtnl_link_stats64?
> 
> Note, using rte_eth_xstats_get() does not help for this particular scenario
> because a common binary API is needed to communicate through
> various layers and also provide a consistent view/meaning to users.  The
> xstats is excellent for debugging device specific scenarios but can't help
> in scenarios where a static view is expected.
> 
> Thanks,
> Dave