From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AC51A0C4A; Thu, 8 Jul 2021 15:21:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1438A40696; Thu, 8 Jul 2021 15:21:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eva.fit.vutbr.cz (eva.fit.vutbr.cz [147.229.176.14]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 648E04014F for ; Thu, 8 Jul 2021 15:21:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from roundcube.fit.vutbr.cz (spytihnev.fit.vutbr.cz [IPv6:2001:67c:1220:809:0:0:93e5:9e2]) (authenticated bits=0) by eva.fit.vutbr.cz (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPSA id 168DKvjl082250 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 8 Jul 2021 15:20:57 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stud.fit.vutbr.cz; s=studfit; t=1625750458; bh=yStVW10DrcHNtt0gddFl8aQAoshVELh8cJW2yfdV3ac=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=sE2pqDAiPc6RG8lQAFHlvoGGmyiFVYkNeZtKSOwTYk1es0TayeQBNuDSZMuw65crH Zj22Inb0qstZ7mQBjHImZUf0jejANany4FsOYMoSYP+QNzaPJaR17VXglP1W0e7pEb rPqlXfmB+CrzZlewCvtBzprnTmXEACm1kRJVDMmE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2021 15:20:57 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Havl=C3=ADk_Martin?= To: "Min Hu (Connor)" Cc: dev@dpdk.org, viktorin@cesnet.cz, chas3@att.com, declan.doherty@intel.com, tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com In-Reply-To: <3b731983-2bc2-746e-4303-6654b2de1193@huawei.com> References: <20210622092531.73112-1-xhavli56@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> <20210622092531.73112-3-xhavli56@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> <3b731983-2bc2-746e-4303-6654b2de1193@huawei.com> User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail Message-ID: <6972a4cc793604dcb6c2e7ce4e0d1586@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> X-Sender: xhavli56@stud.fit.vutbr.cz Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/3] net/bonding: fix not checked return value X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Dne 2021-07-08 14:43, Min Hu (Connor) napsal: > 在 2021/6/22 17:25, Martin Havlik 写道: >> Return value from bond_ethdev_8023ad_flow_set() is now checked >> and appropriate message is logged on error. >> >> Fixes: 112891cd27e5 ("net/bonding: add dedicated HW queues for LACP >> control") >> Cc: tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com >> >> Signed-off-by: Martin Havlik >> Cc: Jan Viktorin >> --- >> drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c | 8 +++++++- >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c >> b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c >> index 4c43bf916..a6755661c 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c >> @@ -1819,8 +1819,14 @@ slave_configure(struct rte_eth_dev >> *bonded_eth_dev, >> >> internals->mode4.dedicated_queues.flow[slave_eth_dev->data->port_id], >> &flow_error); >> - bond_ethdev_8023ad_flow_set(bonded_eth_dev, >> + errval = bond_ethdev_8023ad_flow_set(bonded_eth_dev, >> slave_eth_dev->data->port_id); >> + if (errval != 0) { >> + RTE_BOND_LOG(ERR, >> + "bond_ethdev_8023ad_flow_set: port=%d, err (%d)", >> + slave_eth_dev->data->port_id, errval); >> + return errval; >> + } >> } >> > Firstly, I think your patch is OK, > But I want to know what is your standard to decide which function > should check return value or not(of course, they are none-void)? > I encountered the problem with dedicated queues on mlx5, I looked into the source code and I saw the cause, so I fixed it. If I had seen any other issue, I would've fixed it too. That, for example, applies to the log message fix I included. My standard is to check all non-void return values. > While, I noticed "bond_ethdev_lsc_event_callback" nearby was not > checked, but you ignored it. > Not ignored, just didn't properly review more code than what closely surrounded the problematic lines. >> /* Start device */ >>