Re: [PATCH V2] libibumad: update umad_recv man page.

Hal Rosenstock
2012-07-06T18:34:24Z

On 7/3/2012 12:55 PM, Ira Weiny wrote:
>
> Document the umad_recv length parameter better.
>
> Changes since V1:
> add comments from Hal
>
> Signed-off-by: Ira Weiny <weiny2-i2BcT+NCU+M@public.gmane.org>
> ---
> man/umad_recv.3 | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
> 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/man/umad_recv.3 b/man/umad_recv.3
> index e1b2985..310d3d2 100644
> --- a/man/umad_recv.3
> +++ b/man/umad_recv.3
> @@ -27,10 +27,26 @@ A negative
> makes the function block until a packet is received. A
> .I timeout_ms\fR
> parameter of zero indicates a non blocking read.
> +
> +.B Note
> +.I length
> +is a pointer to the length of the
> +.B data
> +portion of the umad buffer. This means that
> +.I umad
> +should point to a buffer at least umad_size() +
> +.I *length
> +bytes long.
> +
> +.B Note also
> +that
> +.I *length\fR
> +must be >= 256 bytes.

This seems somewhat redundant to me as just above it says "should point
to a bugger that's at least umad_size() + *length bytes long.

Also, if this remains, should "must be" be "should be" ?

> +
> .SH "RETURN VALUE"
> .B umad_recv()
> returns non negative receiving agentid on success, and a negative value on error as follows:
> - -EINVAL invalid port handle or agentid
> + -EINVAL invalid port handle or agentid or *length is less than the minimum

Rather than just minimum, minimum support length might be clearer.

-- Hal

> -EIO receive operation failed
> -EWOULDBLOCK non blocking read can't be fulfilled
> .SH "SEE ALSO"