Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] net/bnxt: fix arguments to _rte_eth_dev_callback_process

[Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>]

On 7/31/2017 12:19 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 7/25/2017 4:32 AM, Ajit Khaparde wrote:
>> The callback arguments to _rte_eth_dev_callback_process() are swapped.
>> Fix them.
>>
>> Fixes: d6af1a13d7a1 ("ethdev: add return values to callback process API")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c b/drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c
>> index dd7e5b8..0463373 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c
>> @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ int bnxt_rcv_msg_from_vf(struct bnxt *bp, uint16_t vf_id, void *msg)
>>  	cb_param.msg = msg;
>>  
>>  	_rte_eth_dev_callback_process(bp->eth_dev, RTE_ETH_EVENT_VF_MBOX,
>> -			&cb_param, NULL);
>> +				      NULL, &cb_param);
> 
> Hi Ajit,
> 
> 
> Since you are using "cb_param.retval", change looks good.
> 
> But it is easy to confuse between cb_param and ret_param. To clarify
> your intention, I suggest renaming "cb_param" to "ret_param", does it
> make sense?

I got other patch in the set, they are not related and to save some work
for you, can you please send a new version of just this patch?

> 
> Thanks,
> ferruh
> 
>>  
>>  	/* Default to approve */
>>  	if (cb_param.retval == RTE_PMD_BNXT_MB_EVENT_PROCEED)
>>
>