From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com (mail-wm0-f42.google.com [74.125.82.42]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6721C1B308 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 23:48:45 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f42.google.com with SMTP id v123so11839430wmd.5 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 14:48:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=OckfL1QZTKFgEET4sHrlTagMCds7thbGFwxVZbD+dqI=; b=1Ex+HJ2E2rzdfixdVcoIJ7kLWZ9q6nIl+c8peByIyub2/okdQNkeZAiq2EUPZBCPzL Fc0ztMWg2UHeCWYvZgyOsKeUgRVqnO1RUYzwGpNVmRx/o+bZhft45HML1CtFG/XYnmYZ y0aWpL0RwT1U1SXrbnvlUjw7917KJxncgoNTJo7ajpIoYO1VBU/eimSGRibzo8n+JUQU 8e/+6y0mK2wzHSCt9sT0erpPdQWP8lqKra4hYIuVqebdTU3koMTpZLvlqvZ/aF7dgqu/ SZPMlzmjS+uu/ep29dI27L7NAvzrRClyQx+A5SnOwrz2+GNpJAlKCgBBrqychasN+QDO qtvQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=OckfL1QZTKFgEET4sHrlTagMCds7thbGFwxVZbD+dqI=; b=GQE5FlZ2pEzqP5qqEu/pRL1SdOVTcMHOmGfJfDx4WU5apkIhCeU98/6VWiedG7ecKA nnrHeStbTU8ZCYQ5fLvnG7IU6S65wn/dwEFr3w1S1fsXu9kF7IqxF5rBT3/313I+RneG f1yZQbvIyFhIli39xMRWEQYu3VE8WcMRgWS4c87l1Ir+4sc0YfAfsUkBlnjOEQLd55nR uWP4b+/sTIM7mcCJoQxDwT3K5uFQh136TjwBoxBFlg8fQ0egw8YR00/iXtNHNY9a/Pmj s17wvQhwvAL33apSlNsJXvBioLwwlXRY2ad3Dth0fsrzN3fUj3veiedE7SckeFoSddQt izBQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytf1Omj3h7J8D7o5aRG48sR1uX7oksvjAF8J6wtYdSxBcLNBMn8F jo1vMn9jXxU+cTMW1+Cuxa0hUdS4 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBovgeu7EV/3m34KAeoXGQgb4kZvuuBmdLYon44tASWNRHChlcknzifOopzV6gxh3dobZmfKwKg== X-Received: by 10.28.167.5 with SMTP id q5mr530206wme.90.1516142924873; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 14:48:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from bidouze.vm.6wind.com (host.78.145.23.62.rev.coltfrance.com. [62.23.145.78]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k20sm6848749wrk.37.2018.01.16.14.48.43 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 16 Jan 2018 14:48:44 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 23:48:32 +0100 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Ga=EBtan?= Rivet To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20180116224832.ogn7bv4ecbdczf5h@bidouze.vm.6wind.com> References: <20180116102906.0df665b6@xeon-e3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20180116102906.0df665b6@xeon-e3> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [BUG] failsafe depending on return value from PMD link_update function. X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 22:48:45 -0000 Hi Stephen, On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 10:29:06AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > While doing link status refactoring, I noticed that the eth_dev_link_update function > return value is unused by common code (in rte_eth_dev_link_get); but is being expected > by failsafe driver. > > The return values are not consistent across drivers, and link update function is only > valid if device is not using LSC. Therefore, the failsafe PMD should not be calling > device internal functions directly and expecting a valid return value. Yes, you are right. I will look into it. -- Gaëtan Rivet 6WIND