From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C70D0A49F for ; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 12:35:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A16820D6C; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 06:35:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 25 Jan 2018 06:35:28 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=bfIXGSgdMTSZRZVxG+2vr6MhF6 Y/HX3hMeRQY2sCvuI=; b=Kbg2g1YiOHCCjtMTbDb4SuAaqltv+1XVPde0XSY38J tcD3lQd086qtYTJSaqaQhdepc4vtKX+o5IXLZu2BeR+fEj+51caz27sOqbSmkSra XvgsnwgFbbn5WnZWfLLuekku3NPXqMq4/eKrGpDt38BTyFh6gjcA6+XqX7eeO2bf c= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=bfIXGS gdMTSZRZVxG+2vr6MhF6Y/HX3hMeRQY2sCvuI=; b=ek1XgMXvnod/JD1GrH03Ns FhNFUCvHrWWJ0mMqKgIlTWp7N+ia1OayghjRLYfqbL9i4YbUEZhJdLyCYUEnKVOg pRkO9n4ucGLGrHL1v4tLQ8BnShZObVB1BDKS604FQBhpfIrzYfp8us+LpkUJk6pO sjTtjv6YCzpbS/yeqVW5arJOeb0/UIV2gA5dcb7VORJauCCjUCqr1/u7RT8IG4hN uBqeg5lp7pGwe8O/dVuFeU5vzwU45uoRpMYED58lEf2fUFquqPSx5PJKb5fsu3cn 2dTaTgflavr/IgOJpLMqcB+AsbnA2x8xCLRB1OuXxBAkXgJxoDUmEk/4YjG2rQKA == X-ME-Sender: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 084EB2463E; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 06:35:28 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Burakov, Anatoly" Cc: Jianfeng Tan , dev@dpdk.org, bruce.richardson@intel.com, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 12:34:46 +0100 Message-ID: <3998210.cxRnO71GkY@xps> In-Reply-To: <6047a7cb-89a9-2969-3872-bb22b0d919d2@intel.com> References: <1512067450-59203-1-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com> <1516853783-108023-2-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com> <6047a7cb-89a9-2969-3872-bb22b0d919d2@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/3] eal: add channel for multi-process communication 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: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 11:35:29 -0000 25/01/2018 12:27, Burakov, Anatoly: > Also, as a general note, i would prefer for sendmsg API's to return 0 on > success and -1 on failure, as number of sent messages is not only > meaningless to the user (since there's no way to tell if the value > returned is the value we expected), but also makes the API unintuitive > and prone to usage errors when using common "if (sendmsg()) {// error}" > idiom. However, i'm fine with leaving it as is, if everyone else is. I have not reviewed it, but I feel you are right.