[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/e1000: xstat RXERRC statictic register added.

[Zhang, Qi Z]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Leonid Myravjev
> Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2018 8:35 PM
> To: Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo.lu at intel.com>
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Leonid Myravjev <asm at asm.pp.ru>
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/e1000: xstat RXERRC statictic register added.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Leonid Myravjev <asm at asm.pp.ru>
> ---
>  drivers/net/e1000/igb_ethdev.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/e1000/igb_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/e1000/igb_ethdev.c
> index d9d29d22f..ebc242cd9 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/e1000/igb_ethdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/e1000/igb_ethdev.c
> @@ -458,6 +458,7 @@ struct rte_igb_xstats_name_off {  static const struct
> rte_igb_xstats_name_off rte_igb_stats_strings[] = {
>  	{"rx_crc_errors", offsetof(struct e1000_hw_stats, crcerrs)},
>  	{"rx_align_errors", offsetof(struct e1000_hw_stats, algnerrc)},
> +	{"rx_rx_errors", offsetof(struct e1000_hw_stats, rxerrc)},

I have no objection for this change, I just feel add all missing field (that be read from register in igb_read_stats_registers) in this array makes the patch complete.
Would do you think?

>  	{"rx_symbol_errors", offsetof(struct e1000_hw_stats, symerrs)},
>  	{"rx_missed_packets", offsetof(struct e1000_hw_stats, mpc)},
>  	{"tx_single_collision_packets", offsetof(struct e1000_hw_stats, scc)},
> --
> 2.17.1