On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 02:46:24PM +0000, Brian Vazquez wrote: > The code uses the vidx for the IRQ name but that doesn't match ethtool > reporting or netdev naming, this makes it hard to tune the device and > associate queues with IRQs. Sequentially requesting irqs starting from > '0' makes the output consistent. > > Before: > > ethtool -L eth1 tx 1 combined 3 > > grep . /proc/irq/*/*idpf*/../smp_affinity_list > /proc/irq/67/idpf-Mailbox-0/../smp_affinity_list:0-55,112-167 > /proc/irq/68/idpf-eth1-TxRx-1/../smp_affinity_list:0 > /proc/irq/70/idpf-eth1-TxRx-3/../smp_affinity_list:1 > /proc/irq/71/idpf-eth1-TxRx-4/../smp_affinity_list:2 > /proc/irq/72/idpf-eth1-Tx-5/../smp_affinity_list:3 > > ethtool -S eth1 | grep -v ': 0' > NIC statistics: > tx_q-0_pkts: 1002 > tx_q-1_pkts: 2679 > tx_q-2_pkts: 1113 > tx_q-3_pkts: 1192 <----- tx_q-3 vs idpf-eth1-Tx-5 > rx_q-0_pkts: 1143 > rx_q-1_pkts: 3172 > rx_q-2_pkts: 1074 > > After: > > ethtool -L eth1 tx 1 combined 3 > > grep . /proc/irq/*/*idpf*/../smp_affinity_list > > /proc/irq/67/idpf-Mailbox-0/../smp_affinity_list:0-55,112-167 > /proc/irq/68/idpf-eth1-TxRx-0/../smp_affinity_list:0 > /proc/irq/70/idpf-eth1-TxRx-1/../smp_affinity_list:1 > /proc/irq/71/idpf-eth1-TxRx-2/../smp_affinity_list:2 > /proc/irq/72/idpf-eth1-Tx-3/../smp_affinity_list:3 > > ethtool -S eth1 | grep -v ': 0' > NIC statistics: > tx_q-0_pkts: 118 > tx_q-1_pkts: 134 > tx_q-2_pkts: 228 > tx_q-3_pkts: 138 <--- tx_q-3 matches idpf-eth1-Tx-3 > rx_q-0_pkts: 111 > rx_q-1_pkts: 366 > rx_q-2_pkts: 120
Are there any ABI issues here? Andrew
