From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f196.google.com (mail-wr0-f196.google.com [209.85.128.196]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 431B41B44C for ; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 09:05:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wr0-f196.google.com with SMTP id h10-v6so2034165wrq.8 for ; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 00:05:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=hBPsPNRweuR2UxrN8renizQFkDcSXaEsHCoXz6XaRLM=; b=fMmqEM/jWqs9Eb8bf4irjCs16I+q4Z/9LM22dxRgI6Av/0ptUFDENgy1Bayt6SS4YD oHkwBAXBi8L4MkiK4vHMidI2RZAI4NFyleyTI8oNC2Waug0IAAxuI9xLRNqpd7fp01mg 0objM9yf827mRFrOeR8KLBtz2Kfn8tQsnp4SCpSL3B6gy9ovywaohgYCYcypWG49/wgH 2nz9WTGZwYFWAwRoJWmucqCuNYA4qFxBwyZeZlXXvf8RMSdz5SAbL9z0kej6g9SWnkFy T1dY7uuTGKYLLYQMzJeQNbcIWzQmCQcRHbtB2Rk1ulmkIVENW6KPJR29lIBjMYITmkv6 o2Sw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=hBPsPNRweuR2UxrN8renizQFkDcSXaEsHCoXz6XaRLM=; b=NTbwpRP794WOAqtKdKi50O8PgSZselG3V/Nqw7wA8B+D4AIyxgBAFAnU5WGm1kZnjw uA6MCeofySWsHqCDdJq95CHemvz0MeNF50HYm8n1Ioem4BcE20vYazMjxEeWCCpAf23o Rf9ATMO0fqqaqquk51i7za3PjTEblZQDVBj2NYmBGFylC9bnWrvvMZJUX/E8gZOperAU OooRdMhBwQruIwVkWObMrT2vPF0Mlumn8aKRd+vn8Fre/nOXE26GCKF5cgr0mq+kwQeb t5qgQoY2PGBN39Q+ybmN/ikvsmrY7GQc9FxG0Srr/sZaH1541kMETi7+jl3CNOz2Hf7l 3/TQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E3IE9p6M1hCULyhIBRsb/LSimNZW0YCcynxSY5tmme0oQvny9T7 sXKsX26wZJympNvTotu0Q9Ja X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKJ+arOYHc16Lx+aTkNYiPJCA1o9tRSbxdYYTm++8HpZeSgkNLikAOoqUJoMAr1F4AO9fZXCzA== X-Received: by 2002:adf:ee0e:: with SMTP id y14-v6mr17619369wrn.63.1529478302042; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 00:05:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com (host.78.145.23.62.rev.coltfrance.com. [62.23.145.78]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l84-v6sm2423217wmi.3.2018.06.20.00.05.01 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 20 Jun 2018 00:05:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 09:05:13 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?N=E9lio?= Laranjeiro To: Yongseok Koh Cc: Adrien Mazarguil , "dev@dpdk.org" , Shahaf Shuler , dpdk stable , "Xueming(Steven) Li" Message-ID: <20180620070513.4n2cgonoudruupyh@laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com> References: <20180604173731.29125-1-yskoh@mellanox.com> <20180605065246.mw7xnk24cfwxy4an@laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com> <84C956B6-28EE-4F82-97AE-5E9C371DD115@mellanox.com> <20180606065501.hhrfrti47nr5xigo@laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com> <20180606183926.GA1446@yongseok-MBP.local> <20180607073944.zewdysx6ddrdygoz@laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com> <42BB3FF2-80B8-4250-928C-32D509E32DAA@mellanox.com> <20180619114852.lzxwjj7ud5owcyuu@laranjeiro-vm.dev.6wind.com> <939801BC-1FFD-4770-A491-81E2F3D847C2@mellanox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <939801BC-1FFD-4770-A491-81E2F3D847C2@mellanox.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Subject: Re: [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] net/mlx5: fix error number handling X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 07:05:02 -0000 On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 11:00:25PM +0000, Yongseok Koh wrote: >[...] > >>> I did not understood it was only a concern about the success of the > >>> function, even it is better to avoid as most as possible a useless > >>> store, in this specific case, as errno (rte_errno) has a garbage value, > >>> I fully agree with you. > >> > >> Nelio, > >> > >> Do you still want me to make any change for this patch? > >> Let me know if any. > > > > With your modification the function documentation is no more accurate as > > rte_errno is always set. > > I still don't agree with that but will send out v2. It's not a big deal. What I meant is, you could have only changed the function documentation. @return 0 on success with rte_errno always set, negative errno otherwise. letting the function documentation saying rte_errno is only modified in case of error whereas it is not is a bug or in the documentation or in the code, but as a function must respect its documentation, it would have raised a bug in the code itself. Regards, -- Nélio Laranjeiro 6WIND