From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev,
	2/2] ethdev: move code to common place in hotplug
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 19:42:48 +0100
Message-ID: <1701908.3Qo6PKQGCI@xps13>
References: <1453377431-25850-3-git-send-email-david.marchand@6wind.com>
 <20160121163836.0bcd405e@pcviktorin.fit.vutbr.cz>
 <CALwxeUsR0ZZFg7UopYyshV-xnwRJiV82h2qC6xmC=ONfz6S9xA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Jan Viktorin <viktorin@rehivetech.com>
To: David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com (mail-wm0-f52.google.com [74.125.82.52])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D156E62
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 19:43:51 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wm0-f52.google.com with SMTP id 123so186229401wmz.0
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:43:51 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CALwxeUsR0ZZFg7UopYyshV-xnwRJiV82h2qC6xmC=ONfz6S9xA@mail.gmail.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <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>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

2016-01-21 19:06, David Marchand:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Jan Viktorin <viktorin@rehivetech.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:57:11 +0100
> > David Marchand <david.marchand@6wind.com> wrote:
> >
> [snip]
> >> @@ -612,14 +599,25 @@ int
> >>  rte_eth_dev_attach(const char *devargs, uint8_t *port_id)
> >>  {
> >>       struct rte_pci_addr addr;
> >> +     int ret = -1;
> >>
> >>       if ((devargs == NULL) || (port_id == NULL))
> >> -             return -EINVAL;
> >> +             goto err;
> >
> > This change modifies the return value from -EINVAL to -1. I don't know
> > whether is this an issue but it looks suspicious.
> 
> Should not be an issue, as the api does not give details on expected
> negative return values.
> Just noticed, this also introduces a new log message that was not
> displayed before.
> 
> To be safe, I suppose I should restore this.
> 
> Thomas, opinion ?

I'm OK with the log message added for this error case.
I would just keep the -EINVAL return value.

Other nit: you are allowed to fix the (moved) log message.