From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79277A0547;
Mon, 19 Apr 2021 02:35:05 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 424D640683;
Mon, 19 Apr 2021 02:35:05 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.190])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F21140040
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 02:35:03 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from DGGEMS404-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.60])
by szxga04-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4FNnpJ1QSsz16L2n;
Mon, 19 Apr 2021 08:32:40 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [10.67.103.128] (10.67.103.128) by
DGGEMS404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.204) with Microsoft SMTP Server id
14.3.498.0; Mon, 19 Apr 2021 08:34:59 +0800
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, Stephen Hemminger
<stephen@networkplumber.org>
CC: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>, <dev@dpdk.org>,
<ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
References: <1618046334-39857-1-git-send-email-humin29@huawei.com>
<20210416092853.39a1517e@hermes.local>
<5315cf0f-bf05-8e1d-9e68-e2b0a0017bd3@huawei.com> <8177946.L7Sm5Rjx4H@thomas>
From: "Min Hu (Connor)" <humin29@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <0f681df8-51f4-18dc-9d59-a0a0a01af0d8@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 08:34:59 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/68.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <8177946.L7Sm5Rjx4H@thomas>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.67.103.128]
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6] ethdev: add sanity checks in control APIs
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
在 2021/4/18 5:37, Thomas Monjalon 写道:
> 17/04/2021 02:28, Min Hu (Connor):
>>
>> 在 2021/4/17 0:28, Stephen Hemminger 写道:
>>> On Fri, 16 Apr 2021 11:22:02 +0100
>>> Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> + if (dev_conf == NULL) {
>>>>> + RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR,
>>>>> + "Cannot configure ethdev port %u to NULL dev_conf\n",
>>>>
>>>> The others use a natural sounding names instead of argument name. If you
>>>> wanted to match that it could be "..to NULL conf"
>>>
>>> I would prefer that error messages don't try to be English sentences.
>>> The wording ends up awkward. and overly wordy.
>>> If function name is automatically included by RTE_ETHDEV_LOG() then
>>> Just:
>>> RTE_ETHDEV_LOG(ERR, "NULL ethdev")
>>> should be enough for programmer to find/fix the problem
>>> .
>> Hi, Stephen,
>> Your opinion is quit different from that of Andrew Rybchenko.
>> Andrew does not support show function name in the log:
>> "- log messages should be human readable (i.e. I'd avoid
>> usage of function name)"
>>
>> @Andrew ,@Thoms, @Ferruh, @Kevin, so, what's your opinion ?
>
> I prefer human readable messages which are unique enough to be "grepped".
>
Agree with Thomas, thanks.
>
> .
>