From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 25/25] rte_eal_init: add info about
	rte_errno codes
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:31:36 -0500
Message-ID: <f7tmvdo8nnr.fsf@redhat.com>
References: <20170208185142.28678-1-aconole@redhat.com>
 <20170209142953.8167-1-aconole@redhat.com>
 <20170209142953.8167-26-aconole@redhat.com>
 <20170209143701.5e01fe9c@xeon-e3>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Cc: dev@dpdk.org,  Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C19CE1077
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 14 Feb 2017 22:31:37 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <20170209143701.5e01fe9c@xeon-e3> (Stephen Hemminger's message of
 "Thu, 9 Feb 2017 14:37:01 -0800")
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>

Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org> writes:

> On Thu,  9 Feb 2017 09:29:53 -0500
> Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> + *   The error codes returned via rte_errno:
>> + *     EACCES indicates a permissions issue.
>> + *
>> + *     EAGAIN indicates either a bus or system resource was not available,
>> + *            try again.
>> + *
>> + *     EALREADY indicates that the rte_eal_init function has already been
>> + *              called, and cannot be called again.
>> + *
>> + *     EFAULT indicates the tailq configuration name was not found in
>> + *            memory configuration.
>> + *
>> + *     EINVAL indicates invalid parameters were passed as argv/argc.
>> + *
>> + *     EIO indicates failure to setup the logging handlers.  This is usually
>> + *         caused by an out-of-memory condition.
>> + *
>> + *     ENODEV indicates memory setup issues.
>> + *
>> + *     ENOTSUP indicates that the EAL cannot initialize on this system.
>> + *
>> + *     EUNATCH indicates that the PCI bus is either not present, or is not
>> + *             readable by the eal.
>>   */
>
> You might want to be less restrictive about wording in the comment.
> In future more errors might be returned, and also for out of memory
> ENOMEM is better.

Sure thing, I'll switch EIO and ENODEV to ENOMEM, does that make sense?

Also, which message do you refer to?  Is it "The error codes returned
via rte_errno" section?  I assume that adding new error codes will also
bring an update to the eal_init documentation, but perhaps I'm
misunderstanding.

Thanks for your review, Stephen!