From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7673B2BB5 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 2018 11:07:55 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Jan 2018 02:07:54 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,367,1511856000"; d="scan'208";a="166455122" Received: from aburakov-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.145]) ([10.237.220.145]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Jan 2018 02:07:52 -0800 To: Jonas Pfefferle , Thomas Monjalon Cc: dev@dpdk.org References: <1509465586-7436-1-git-send-email-jpf@zurich.ibm.com> <5559040.Nhk1psZjz2@xps> <45d1aa7c-2ceb-b6df-8e16-83ff1316cba1@intel.com> <2075027.JcYejM7RvO@xps> From: "Burakov, Anatoly" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 10:07:51 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] vfio: noiommu check error handling 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 10:07:55 -0000 On 15-Jan-18 12:22 PM, Jonas Pfefferle wrote: > >  On Sat, 13 Jan 2018 23:49:30 +0100 >  Thomas Monjalon wrote: >> 13/01/2018 13:15, Burakov, Anatoly: >>> On 11-Jan-18 11:45 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: >>> > 07/11/2017 10:50, Jonas Pfefferle1: >>> >>> Is there something urgent for 17.11? >>> >>> Or can it be refined in 18.02? >>> >> >>> >> Nothing urgent. We can refine this for 18.02. >>> >> >>> >>> Anatoly, any thought? >>> > > Anatoly, Jonas, how do you want to proceed with this patch? >>> > >>> I don't see anything to be refined here, it's a simple bug fix - code >>> assumes noiommu mode support is always available, when it might not >>> be the case on older kernels. >> >> As a bug fix, the title must start with "fix" and a tag "Fixes:" >> must be added to help with backport. >> At the same time, the explanation of the bug must be added in >> the commit log please. >> >> Thanks > > It's not really a bug fix since it does not change the semantic of the > function but just adds nicer error handling. Well, as far as i can tell, it *does* change semantics - previously, if noiommu mode file was not found, we returned -1, now we return 0. -- Thanks, Anatoly