Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] cryptodev: fix cryptodev start return value

["Trahe, Fiona" <fiona.trahe@intel.com>]

Hi Pavan,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Pavan Nikhilesh
> Sent: Wednesday, June 7, 2017 11:37 AM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Doherty, Declan <declan.doherty@intel.com>; Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula
> <pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] cryptodev: fix cryptodev start return value
> 
> From: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula <pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
> 
> If cryptodev has already started it should return -EBUSY instead of 0
> when rte_cryptodev_start is called.
> 
> Fixes: d11b0f30df88 ("cryptodev: introduce API and framework for crypto devices")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavatula@caviumnetworks.com>
> ---
>  lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c b/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c
> index b65cd9c..c815038 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c
> @@ -1000,7 +1000,7 @@ rte_cryptodev_start(uint8_t dev_id)
>  	if (dev->data->dev_started != 0) {
>  		CDEV_LOG_ERR("Device with dev_id=%" PRIu8 " already started",
>  			dev_id);
> -		return 0;
> +		return -EBUSY;
It makes sense to me to return 0/success in this case, as the end result is the
same, the device is successfully started.
But I don't feel strongly about it if there's a good argument for making the change?
However, as it is an API change doesn't it need to be flagged in a release before the change is made?


}
> 
>  	diag = (*dev->dev_ops->dev_start)(dev);
> --
> 2.7.4