[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/7] app/proc-info: eliminate useless borders

[Stephen Hemminger]

On Fri, 14 Aug 2020 11:08:31 +0000
"Varghese, Vipin" <vipin.varghese at intel.com> wrote:

> Hi Stephen,
> 
> >   
> > > snipped  
> > > >
> > > > snipped  
> > > > > >
> > > > > > snipped  
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 15/07/2020 23:22, Stephen Hemminger:  
> > > > > > > > Printing extra borders does not improve readability, and is
> > > > > > > > just unnecessary. Putting TSC hz in header also makes no sense  
> > here.  
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The CPU frequency on headers!
> > > > > > > OK to remove :)
> > > > > > >  
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The rational of having Time Stamp Counter as the header for port
> > > > > > info and  
> > > > > stats, is to account for each iteration for an average `packets
> > > > > per second`. That is using `watch -d -n 1 ./dpdk-procinfo -- --xstats | grep -  
> > v ": 0"`.  
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But if there better way to do this or add as new feature, +1 to remove.  
> > > > >
> > > > > Proc info should just use standard clock for its updates, not TSC?  
> > > >
> > > > Can you please explain the rationale behind the (syscall for time) and not  
> > TSC?  
> > >
> > > Looking forward for the patch with clock change too.  
> > 
> > There is no part of what proc-info is show with xstats that displays or uses tsc
> > directly.
> > Do you have a driver that is putting TSC information in xstats?  
> 
> I am sorry I did not follow you on this, In the earlier implementation with `proc-info` header we had TSC so coupling `--show --xstats`. But with the header removed out with TSC, how can we get this?

I am asking why is the TSC hz a useful piece of information here?
Sure, proc-info could print lots of things but unless it serves a useful purpose
for examining the interfaces, it is just noise.

Developers love to clutter output, but it just raises the signal to noise ratio.