From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <johndale@cisco.com> Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FA0F2C35 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 00:41:29 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=607; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1491518490; x=1492728090; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references; bh=mD6N7ObdtMnfhaieweQlYp0KctOBe5K5ha3FgS9eYdw=; b=BMbYLj0n5ZFndKO+u97SvIhq/Y4zjOa0+fToAWTCpfpGbu//h51akoIj 9Mynwo3DSf9QattdUEJKO7mA1NO4l2fI3TBjB2TGyqc/UH6gSCh758f4o 1LwK4mrx3DvvgK5Ptp9wblkjfGV3IomHaY6SnWOU27/8Ogjjq4ccDaOpx c=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.37,161,1488844800"; d="scan'208";a="11871244" Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Apr 2017 22:41:28 +0000 Received: from cisco.com (savbu-usnic-a.cisco.com [10.193.184.48]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v36MfSYl010245; Thu, 6 Apr 2017 22:41:28 GMT Received: by cisco.com (Postfix, from userid 392789) id 476FD20F2001; Thu, 6 Apr 2017 15:41:28 -0700 (PDT) From: John Daley <johndale@cisco.com> To: adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com Cc: thomas.monjalon@6wind.com, dev@dpdk.org, John Daley <johndale@cisco.com> Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 15:41:25 -0700 Message-Id: <20170406224126.30345-1-johndale@cisco.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.12.0 In-Reply-To: <20170324023659.28099-2-johndale@cisco.com> References: <20170324023659.28099-2-johndale@cisco.com> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/1] fix flow validate comments X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <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: Thu, 06 Apr 2017 22:41:31 -0000 Adrien, Here is another crack at the comments for rte_flow_validate. Does this capture what you were explaining to me? I'm still not crazy about multiple meanings for EEXIST or ENOMEM since it makes them unusable by apps, but at least the comments try to explain it. In 17.08 what about having PMDs indicate if they support flow collision and resouce checking, or drop those return codes all together? cheers, john John Daley (1): ethdev: fix flow validate comments lib/librte_ether/rte_flow.h | 17 ++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) -- 2.12.0