DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>
To: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
	Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>, dev <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal/linux: fix return after alarm registration failure
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 13:52:17 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f22ddd9f-b1c7-fe45-9c29-a6651f9f47ce@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190626123623.GB862@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>

On 26-Jun-19 1:36 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 01:55:53PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>> 26/06/2019 13:43, Burakov, Anatoly:
>>> On 26-Jun-19 12:39 PM, David Marchand wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 1:36 PM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 26/06/2019 13:20, David Marchand:
>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 12:41 PM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When adding an alarm, if an error happen when registering
>>>>>>> the common alarm callback, it is not considered as a major failure.
>>>>>>> The alarm is then inserted in the list.
>>>>>>> However it was returning an error code after inserting the alarm.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The error code is reset to 0 so the behaviour and the return code
>>>>>>> are consistent.
>>>>>>> Other return code related lines are cleaned up for easier
>>>>> understanding.
>>>>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> --- a/lib/librte_eal/linux/eal/eal_alarm.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/linux/eal/eal_alarm.c
>>>>>>>           if (!handler_registered) {
>>>>>>> -               ret |= rte_intr_callback_register(&intr_handle,
>>>>>>> +               ret = rte_intr_callback_register(&intr_handle,
>>>>>>>                                   eal_alarm_callback, NULL);
>>>>>>> -               handler_registered = (ret == 0) ? 1 : 0;
>>>>>>> +               if (ret == 0)
>>>>>>> +                       handler_registered = 1;
>>>>>>> +               else
>>>>>>> +                       /* not fatal, callback can be registered later
>>>>> */
>>>>>>> +                       ret = 0;
>>>>>>>           }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, then it means that you don't want to touch ret at all.
>>>>>> How about:
>>>>>> if (rte_intr_callback_register(&intr_handle,
>>>>>>                                  eal_alarm_callback, NULL) == 0)
>>>>>>           handler_registered = 1;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Too much simple :)
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we try to avoid calling a function in a "if"
>>>>> per coding style.
>>>>> And my proposal has the benefit of offering a comment
>>>>> about the non-fatal error.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> /* not fatal, callback can be registered later */
>>>> if (rte_intr_callback_register(&intr_handle,
>>>>                                 eal_alarm_callback, NULL) == 0)
>>>>          handler_registered = 1;
>>>>
>>>
>>> I prefer the original. It's more explicit and conveys the intention
>>> better. Did i break the tie? :)
>>
>> I was going to send a v2 with David's suggestion.
>> Now I'm confused.
>>
> I always tend to prefer shorter versions, so +1 for v2 (does that make it a
> v3? :-) )
> 
> /Bruce
> 

OK, but then the suggested comment needs to be fixed. It makes it seem 
like registering the handler is the "non fatal" part. Perhaps something 
like:

/* failed register is not a fatal error - callback can be registered 
later */

-- 
Thanks,
Anatoly

  reply	other threads:[~2019-06-26 12:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-26 10:40 Thomas Monjalon
2019-06-26 11:20 ` David Marchand
2019-06-26 11:36   ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-06-26 11:39     ` David Marchand
2019-06-26 11:43       ` Burakov, Anatoly
2019-06-26 11:55         ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-06-26 12:36           ` Bruce Richardson
2019-06-26 12:52             ` Burakov, Anatoly [this message]
2019-06-26 13:20               ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-06-26 14:02 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Thomas Monjalon
2019-06-26 23:09   ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-06-27 15:25     ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] " Thomas Monjalon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=f22ddd9f-b1c7-fe45-9c29-a6651f9f47ce@intel.com \
    --to=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).