On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 12:19 PM Ilya Maximets <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>
> On 25.04.2019 13:03, Kevin Traynor wrote:
> > On 25/04/2019 10:50, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/19/19 9:58 AM, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> >>> On 18.04.2019 17:05, David Marchand wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 4:16 PM Kevin Traynor <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>      On 16/04/2019 10:45, David Marchand wrote:
> >>>>      > @@ -1171,6 +1173,9 @@ pmd_info_show_rxq(struct ds *reply,
> struct dp_netdev_pmd_thread *pmd)
> >>>>      >              } else {
> >>>>      >                  ds_put_format(reply, "%s", "NOT AVAIL");
> >>>>      >              }
> >>>>      > +            if (!netdev_rxq_enabled(list[i].rxq->rx)) {
> >>>>      > +                ds_put_cstr(reply, "  polling: disabled");
> >>>>      > +            }
> >>>>
> >>>>      It's just a personal preference but I'm not crazy about the
> additional
> >>>>      columns appearing/disappearing. Also it seems like it's more
> fundamental
> >>>>      than the % usage and should be closer to the queue-id. It's
> currently
> >>>>
> >>>>      port: v0        queue-id:  0  pmd usage: 13 %
> >>>>      port: v0        queue-id:  1  pmd usage:  0 %  polling: disabled
> >>>>      port: v1        queue-id:  0  pmd usage: 13 %
> >>>>      port: v1        queue-id:  1  pmd usage:  0 %  polling: disabled
> >>>>
> >>>>      As suggestion, could be:
> >>>>
> >>>>      port: v0        queue-id:  0   enabled  pmd usage: 13 %
> >>>>      port: v0        queue-id:  1  disabled  pmd usage:  0 %
> >>>>      port: v1        queue-id:  0   enabled  pmd usage: 13 %
> >>>>      port: v1        queue-id:  1  disabled  pmd usage:  0 %
> >>>
> >>> Maybe:
> >>>
> >>>        port: v0        queue-id:  0             pmd usage: 13 %
> >>>        port: v0        queue-id:  1 (disabled)  pmd usage:  0 %
> >>>        port: v1        queue-id:  0             pmd usage: 13 %
> >>>        port: v1        queue-id:  1 (disabled)  pmd usage:  0 %
> >>>
> >>
> >> I prefer David's second proposal:
> >>  >>      port: v1        queue-id:  0   enabled  pmd usage: 13 %
> >>  >>      port: v1        queue-id:  1  disabled  pmd usage:  0 %
> >>
> >> It would be easier to parse in scripts.
> >>
> >
> > I think it's better to be explicit too. I'm sure people on this mail
> > would know, but it might not be clear for a user whether no status means
> > enabled or unknown.
>
> OK. I will not insist. However I'd like the words to be left side aligned:
>
>       port: v1        queue-id:  0  enabled   pmd usage: 13 %
>       port: v1        queue-id:  1  disabled  pmd usage:  0 %
>

Yes, I can see no reason to align this to the right.
Actually while doing the patch I had done this change before realising that
Kevin had left aligned it.



> So it'll be harder to misread "enabled pmd usage". Or, probably, we could
> still parenthesize them keeping closer to the number as in my proposal:
>
>       port: v1        queue-id:  0 (enabled)   pmd usage: 13 %
>       port: v1        queue-id:  1 (disabled)  pmd usage:  0 %
>

Separating this from "pmd usage" with a parenthesis is clearer.
Ok for me.


New version incoming (sorry, I was on pto these last days).

-- 
David Marchand
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to