On Thu, 21 May 2026 14:40:47 +0200 Morten Brørup <[email protected]> wrote:
> > From: fengchengwen [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Thursday, 21 May 2026 14.25 > > > > Thanks for the feedback. > > > > I intend to keep the current dict format. This concise ID-name mapping > > is quite > > helpful and easy to read especially when there are massive ports, which > > is exactly > > the main purpose why I submitted this patch. > > > > In my opinion, adopting OData-style query would require architecture- > > level > > refactoring of telemetry framework, which is way too heavy for this > > simple requirement. > > Agree. > Refactoring the telemetry framework is different task, not related to this > patch. > > > For complex query demands, we can implement them by extending the > > upper-layer Python > > telemetry script instead. > > > > So I suggest we keep this simple form here. > > If it is generally acceptable for DPDK telemetry that a request for a list > does not return a list type, but returns an object type with "index": "value" > fields instead, then > Series-acked-by: Morten Brørup <[email protected]> It is necessary since port list may have holes due to hotplug or the ownership API. It would be good to have a more complete query function that returns more about each ethdev. I wouldn't worry about the size of the response. This is JSON and it is meant to be read by scripts not directly by humans.
