On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 03:36:45PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2014-09-28 08:27, Neil Horman: > > On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 05:28:44AM +0000, Wiles, Roger Keith wrote: > > > Check the FILE *f and rte_mempool *mp pointers for NULL and > > > return plus print out a message if RTE_LIBRTE_MEMPOOL_DEBUG is enabled. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Keith Wiles <keith.wiles at windriver.com> > > > > I'm fine with this, as I think passing in a NULL mempool is clearly a bug > > here, > > thats worth panicing over, though I wouldnt mind if we did a RTE_VERIFY_WARN > > macro here instead using what I suggested in my other note > > Passing a NULL mempool to rte_mempool_dump() is a bug in the application. > If you look elsewhere in the DPDK code, you'll see that it's not common to do > such check on input parameters. > A similar discussion already happened few months ago: > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-June/003900.html > Not sure what your point is here Thomas. I think we're all in agreement that NULL is a bad value to pass in here. Are you asserting that we shouldn't bother with a NULL check at all and just accept the crash as it is?
Neil > -- > Thomas >
