Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 04:46:37PM CEST, ro...@cumulusnetworks.com wrote: >On 8/23/16, 12:26 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 09:04:15AM CEST, da...@davemloft.net wrote: >>> From: Jiri Pirko <j...@resnulli.us> >>> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 08:53:18 +0200 >>> >>>> Anyway I think that next level of nesting is not necessary. On >>>> contrary, it is wrong. The current level is extensible, mixed and >>>> flagged already. I don't see any reason why not to add whatever kind of >>>> stats here. What makes IFLA_STATS_LINK_SW_64 or for example >>>> IFLA_STATS_LINK_HW_ACL so special it has to be nested in some other >>>> attr? I would understand it it would be values of one family, but that >>>> is not the case. >>> First, I agree with Roopa. If we want to put this stuff out >>> there is should be bucketed together in a nested attribute with >>> other similar stats specifications. >> Well I still don't think that IFLA_STATS_LINK_SW_64 and >> IFLA_STATS_LINK_HW_ACL are related. You cannot put it under *DRIVER* >> nest as IFLA_STATS_LINK_SW_64 are core stats. >not sure i understand, why is this core stats ?. >should a new logical device implement IFLA_STATS_LINK_64 or >IFLA_STATS_LINK_SW_64 ? >any other users ?. > > >> So we can put them under >> *MISC* nest attr. But that is exactly purpose of the top-level here. >> /me confused > >By design top level is for higher level grouping of stats (that also helps us >maintain a lean higher >level filter space). They are mainly categories of stats. for example we have >a nested link >XSTATS attribute..which are again a break down of stats already counted in >IFLA_STATS_LINK_64. >That's why I think we can group this into another kind of breakdown stats.
I give up. What name do you suggest for the nested attribute? Thanks.
