From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ethdev: pre-emptively document
 rte_eth_dev_reset error code
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 13:00:28 +0100
Message-ID: <1508846428.29685.18.camel@debian.org>
References: <20171019134827.22740-1-luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
 <20171019134827.22740-2-luca.boccassi@gmail.com>
 <f8b9604d-c718-8b1a-c97d-3c3ebd24a295@intel.com> <3757028.oCNDDIN3Jm@xps>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, wenzhuo.lu@intel.com, wei.dai@intel.com
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, Remy Horton <remy.horton@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f66.google.com (mail-wm0-f66.google.com [74.125.82.66])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4C321B73F
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 24 Oct 2017 14:00:30 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-wm0-f66.google.com with SMTP id r68so15797437wmr.3
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 24 Oct 2017 05:00:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <3757028.oCNDDIN3Jm@xps>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <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>

On Tue, 2017-10-24 at 00:11 +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 19/10/2017 16:53, Remy Horton:
> >=20
> > On 19/10/2017 14:48, luca.boccassi@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Document it immediately even if it's not yet supported, so that
> > > users
> > > and developers can already take into account about this use case,
> > > and
> > > thus avoid an API-incompatible change later on.
> >=20
> > I'm not sure about documenting unimplemented features, as API docs
> > ought=C2=A0
> > to describe what the code currently does. Then again reason seems
> > OK and=C2=A0
> > I don't think there's hard guidelines on this..
>=20
> An API does not need to be implemented to describe its behaviour.
> We just have to agree about which behaviour we want to expect.
>=20
> It seems this error code is reasonable.
> But I am not sure you need to give the details about the cause
> of the error. The most important is to advise app writer to retry
> resetting later when the device is ready. Isn't it?

Sure, makes sense, see v2.

--=20
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi