From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <mhall@mhcomputing.net>
Received: from mail.mhcomputing.net (master.mhcomputing.net [74.208.46.186])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95AA07E7E
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 24 Oct 2014 20:56:02 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail.mhcomputing.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
 id 5E83380C50B; Fri, 24 Oct 2014 12:03:33 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 12:03:33 -0700
From: Matthew Hall <mhall@mhcomputing.net>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Message-ID: <20141024190333.GD29024@mhcomputing.net>
References: <20141006091344.GA14759@mhcomputing.net>
 <20141024183629.0740fd72@uryu.home.lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20141024183629.0740fd72@uryu.home.lan>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Possible bug in eal_pci pci_scan_one
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 18:56:02 -0000

On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 06:36:29PM +0530, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> The code is fairly consistent in returning -1 for cases of not a NUMA socket,
> bogus port value. It is interpreted as SOCKET_ID_ANY in several places.
> The examples mostly check for -1 and use socket 0 as a fallback.
> Probably not worth introducing more return values and breaking existing
> applications.

OK. So I'll make a patch to correct the comment which was wrong.

Matthew.