On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 03:13:43PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 14:12:50 -0700 Alexander Duyck wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 12:53 PM Jakub Kicinski <k...@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > @@ -3546,6 +3556,7 @@ static const struct ethtool_ops ixgbe_ethtool_ops =
> > > {
> > > .set_eeprom = ixgbe_set_eeprom,
> > > .get_ringparam = ixgbe_get_ringparam,
> > > .set_ringparam = ixgbe_set_ringparam,
> > > + .get_pause_stats = ixgbe_get_pause_stats,
> > > .get_pauseparam = ixgbe_get_pauseparam,
> > > .set_pauseparam = ixgbe_set_pauseparam,
> > > .get_msglevel = ixgbe_get_msglevel,
> >
> > So the count for this is simpler in igb than it is for ixgbe. I'm
> > assuming you want just standard link flow control frames. If so then
> > this patch is correct. Otherwise if you are wanting to capture
> > priority flow control data then those are a seperate array of stats
> > prefixed with a "p" instead of an "l". Otherwise this looks fine to
> > me.
>
> That's my interpretation, although I haven't found any place the
> standard would address this directly. Non-PFC pause has a different
> opcode, so I'm reasonably certain this makes sense.
>
> BTW I'm not entirely clear on what "global PFC pause" is either.
>
> Maybe someone can clarify? Mellanox folks?
I checked IEEE 802.1Qaz and could not find anything relevant. My only
guess is that it might be a PFC frame with all the priorities set.
Where did you see it?
>
> > Reviewed-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.du...@linux.intel.com>
>
> Thanks!
>
