From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 160D7A04B7; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 08:18:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7482F1DCE0; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 08:16:31 +0200 (CEST) Received: from shelob.oktetlabs.ru (shelob.oktetlabs.ru [91.220.146.113]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6D131DCD6; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 08:16:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.38.17] (aros.oktetlabs.ru [192.168.38.17]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by shelob.oktetlabs.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 69EAE7F587; Wed, 14 Oct 2020 09:16:28 +0300 (MSK) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 shelob.oktetlabs.ru 69EAE7F587 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=oktetlabs.ru; s=default; t=1602656188; bh=RCqFK3n3a7cUNoLaG0vPcJ5dt2S5lq7stcPiBf8jjbo=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=yXPL8jwAsJYOSQ7TveYqGe1TrOfhkonoUNXhi7zbNpNtIIdb1jUQnOazTPdK2K7mB wP5JiI6A+XflTrWLoED2gLmLXKIFwu4JJtgP+6lMMdd1MYLylY2/cYy+g7ORiMn3qD J2Bh53T5S5OUerQ6mMZqUXIHQSrc8Z8tBYeRE86M= To: Ferruh Yigit , dev@dpdk.org Cc: Thomas Monjalon , "techboard@dpdk.org" References: <1602600818-7473-1-git-send-email-arybchenko@solarflare.com> <8f8907cf-d905-c867-cf42-694d16b0a0cf@intel.com> <236f87f5-c798-4d83-b821-abed61253191@oktetlabs.ru> <746882bb-79ee-a368-4dee-20846f4f9070@intel.com> From: Andrew Rybchenko Organization: OKTET Labs Message-ID: Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 09:16:28 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.3.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <746882bb-79ee-a368-4dee-20846f4f9070@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: unify error code if port ID is invalid 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 10/13/20 7:12 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 10/13/2020 4:39 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote: >> On 10/13/20 6:32 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: >>> On 10/13/2020 3:53 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote: >>>> Use ENODEV as the error code if specified port ID is invalid. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko >>>> --- >>>>    lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++---------------- >>>>    lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h | 46 >>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>    2 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c >>>> b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c >>>> index 5b7979a3b8..1f862f918a 100644 >>>> --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c >>>> +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c >>>> @@ -784,7 +784,7 @@ rte_eth_dev_get_name_by_port(uint16_t port_id, >>>> char *name) >>>>    { >>>>        char *tmp; >>>>    -    RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -EINVAL); >>>> +    RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -ENODEV); >>> >>> Thanks Andrew, +1 to this error unification. >>> >>> This will be API change without deprecation notice, cc'ed techboard >>> for it. >> >> Yes, thanks. >> >>> >>> If this should (almost) always return '-ENODEV', does it make sense to >>> make another wrapper macro for it, to prevent later other error types >>> used again. >> >> Unlikely, since most likely the line will be simply copied. >> RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET will remain in any case, so >> it will be possible to misuse it anyway. >> > > Agree it won't prevent misuse completely but may help, anyway I don't > have a strong opinion here, if you think that is not needed, that is OK. > >>> >>> And there are a few instances returning '-1', are they left >>> intentionally? >> >> Yes. Inside ethdev it is either socket_id or fd in these cases. >> > > Can't those two also updated to return '-ENODEV' when 'port_id' is not > valid? I think no. 1. rte_eth_dev_socket_id() should not return -ENODEV since it can return -1 even if port ID is valid if fact (I see printouts from time to time if I'm not mistaken) and typically handled as unspecified NUMA node ID. 2. rte_eth_dev_rx_intr_ctl_q_get_fd() explicitly says that -1 is returned on error. The function is still experimental and we can change it, but I'd say that -1 match typical behavior for functions returning file descriptor. Let's limit the changeset to switch from EINVAL to ENODEV.