From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75D181B24E for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2017 21:34:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id C785320F35; Mon, 9 Oct 2017 15:34:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 09 Oct 2017 15:34:30 -0400 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:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=FUNC2puYqhemRV/ ONNedwF6vWUFE6513b5EzBtDK59A=; b=ggIsLJjUQp74w68r9B8gn0LNQUXKlDU 3MpSRtIsvJG7oRqeoZxs6Od+obyK98lL7cjJKDPjOt5n7jh9lCKqJwCyZ9BA7E+E TfJrRczs9F5AJBGFukwbIQE9Q0uwC/cZpr94p1vgCxvwmdy3+EVdDxIRerkacE3n uewq7SoQwUZw= 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:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=FUNC2puYqhemRV/ONNedwF6vWUFE6513b5EzBtDK59A=; b=kxMLPE2w dMw6dp0PDyUQZAmlSGmwC9xHt3jsd6fFglmrgV+kBQUqNQ/ygDZyPva1DLJwS8NV nrd9PHoy2B6Ejvdh8L2GAOoq24LNrcmHYSo0zlI7/+lgJbYQPx1PtGl2bwyrt+CB Zf8Wne+c9grn75pCzX3JqKtcRLjARm9FIGFNQuNduSjCQ+p1hBNBICyFEt05ZsJO r9EwBThXeRzcdXZ63/Qq9qvOBoombusFGQhZlk+Q2VBjeXlICKsWlTIlJpDO5YJK VdZZgIA29nBwxyA0SJ6sLhKcYnFh8vvoS6xFVsHjMP7tHk/U9h0ZkR0YrT6mCVJJ G8JdGMp6KjT47Q== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: 8VfGxEFOYt6eJPIoHCsbsCJ9efqz+EEwgIIYDH/7i5Fs 1507577670 Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 75BAC7FA76; Mon, 9 Oct 2017 15:34:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Don Provan Cc: Shreyansh Jain , Jan Blunck , dev@dpdk.org, Hemant Agrawal Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2017 21:34:29 +0200 Message-ID: <1734685.IGg5jlFBpv@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20170812102220.27773-1-shreyansh.jain@nxp.com> <83422f57-4c0e-5806-c741-ed5ce10891b0@nxp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: bus scan and probe never fail 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: Mon, 09 Oct 2017 19:34:31 -0000 09/10/2017 20:21, Don Provan: > From: Shreyansh Jain [mailto:shreyansh.jain@nxp.com] > >... > > This is where I have disagreement/doubt. > > Reporting error code from rte_bus_scan would do two things: > > > > 1. rte_eal_init is not designed to ignore/log-only these errors - it > > would quit initialization. (But, this can be changed) > > 2. What should rte_eal_init do with this error? rte_bus_scan would have > > already printed the problematic bus->scan() failure. > > These practical problems confirm to me that the failure of a bus > scan is more of a strategic issue: when asking "which devices can > I use?", "none" is a perfectly valid answer that does not seem > like an error to me even when a failed bus scan is the reason for > that answer. > > From the application's point of view, the potential error here > is that the device it wants to use isn't available. I don't see that > either the init function or the probe function will have enough > information to understand that application-level problem, so > they should leave it to the application to detect it. Thank you Don. I think you convinced me.