Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 05:35:53PM CEST, d...@cumulusnetworks.com wrote: >On 6/17/16 8:54 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: >>On 16-06-17 10:05 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>>Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 03:48:35PM CEST, d...@cumulusnetworks.com wrote: >>>>On 6/17/16 2:24 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>>>> >> >>> >>>That is problematic. Existing apps depend on rtnetlink stats. But if we >>>don't count offloaded forwarded packets, the apps don't see anything. >>>Therefore I believe that this patchset approach is better. The existing >>>apps continue to work and future apps can use newly introduces sw_stats >>>to query slowpath traffic. Makes sense to me. >>> >> >>I agree with Jiri. It is a bad idea to depend on ethtool for any of >>this stuff. Is there a way we can tag netlink stats instead >>to indicate they are hardware or software? > >Right, old API but the key here is that low level h/w stats are returned by a >different API. > >By default ip, ifconfig, snmpd, etc all continue to get traditional S/W stats >- counters as seen by the CPU.
Yep. And I believe that for offloaded forwarding, this tools should see hw counters, as they show what is going on in real.
