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 DB1D0A0548;
	Thu,  2 Dec 2021 13:34:02 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71F2B40692;
	Thu,  2 Dec 2021 13:34:02 +0100 (CET)
Received: from smartserver.smartsharesystems.com
 (smartserver.smartsharesystems.com [77.243.40.215])
 by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B475C4067B;
 Thu,  2 Dec 2021 13:34:00 +0100 (CET)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [PATCH v1] gpudev: return EINVAL if invalid input pointer for
 free and unregister
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2021 13:33:53 +0100
Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35D86D33@smartserver.smartshare.dk>
In-Reply-To: <3625450.hdfAi7Kttb@thomas>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v1] gpudev: return EINVAL if invalid input pointer for
 free and unregister
Thread-Index: AdfnTONT8KbAPntnS6OatjpyXD3GgQAKrLZQ
References: <20211118192802.23955-1-eagostini@nvidia.com>
 <YZ5+yAwjgf6B57Np@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <20211201213749.GA5097@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net>
 <3625450.hdfAi7Kttb@thomas>
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Morten_Br=F8rup?= <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: "Thomas Monjalon" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
 "Tyler Retzlaff" <roretzla@linux.microsoft.com>,
 "Bruce Richardson" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: <techboard@dpdk.org>, <dev@dpdk.org>,
 "Andrew Rybchenko" <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>,
 "David Marchand" <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
 "Ferruh Yigit" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
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

> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net]
> Sent: Thursday, 2 December 2021 08.19
>=20
> 01/12/2021 22:37, Tyler Retzlaff:
> > On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 06:04:56PM +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > >   if (ret < 0 && rte_errno =3D=3D EAGAIN)
> >
> > i only urge that this be explicit as opposed to a range i.e. ret =
=3D=3D -
> 1
> > preferred over ret < 0
>=20
> I don't understand why you think it is important to limit return value
> to -1.
> Why "if (ret =3D=3D -1)" is better than "if (ret < 0)" ?

Speaking for myself:

For clarity. It leaves no doubt that "it failed" is represented by the =
return value -1, and that the function does not return errno values such =
as -EINVAL.

-Morten