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 820D32E8F
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  3 Aug 2015 07:04:58 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail.mhcomputing.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
 id 513B180A0A6; Sun,  2 Aug 2015 22:04:41 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2015 22:04:41 -0700
From: Matthew Hall <mhall@mhcomputing.net>
To: "Liang, Cunming" <cunming.liang@intel.com>
Message-ID: <20150803050441.GA8325@mhcomputing.net>
References: <D0158A423229094DA7ABF71CF2FA0DA311981B28@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <1438306572-25434-1-git-send-email-cunming.liang@intel.com>
 <20150801035655.GA29805@mhcomputing.net>
 <55BEC80E.5010309@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <55BEC80E.5010309@intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal/linux: fix negative value for
 undetermined numa_node
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: Mon, 03 Aug 2015 05:04:58 -0000

On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 09:46:54AM +0800, Liang, Cunming wrote:
> According to the API definition, if the socket could not be determined, a
> default of zero will take.
> The '-1' is returned when the port_id value is out of range.

Yes, but when I asked the exact same question and was told the documentation 
was wrong not the -1 return value.

> To your concern, "difference between no NUMA, something running on socket
> zero, and something with multiple sockets.".
> The latter two belongs to the same situation, that is the numa_node stores
> the NUMA id.
> So in fact the concern is about using '-1' or '0' when there's no NUMA
> detect.
> If we won't plan to redefine the API return value, the fix patch is
> reasonable.
> 
> Btw, if it returns '-1' when no NUMA is detected, what will you do, do
> condition check '-1' and then use node 0 instead ?
> In that way, you can't distinguish '-'1 is out of range port_id error or no
> NUMA detection error.

I asked that question also, and the answer I got was to use node 0 instead.

> If it is, why not follow the API definition.

Sure, if nobody objects like the last time I asked. But this will change the 
user behavior as I am looking for the -1 now.

> /Steve

Matthew.