On 2014/10/29 11:44, Matthew Hall wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 03:27:58AM +0000, Qiu, Michael wrote:
>> I just saw one return path with value '0', and no any other place
>> return a negative value, so it is better to be designed as one
>> non-return function,
>>
>> +void
>> +rte_eal_hugepage_free(void)
>> +{
>> + struct hugepage_file *hugepg_tbl = g_hugepage_table.hugepg_tbl;
>> + unsigned i;
>> + unsigned nr_hugefiles = g_hugepage_table.nr_hugefiles;
>> +
>> + RTE_LOG(INFO, EAL, "unlink %u hugepage files\n", nr_hugefiles);
>> +
>> + for (i = 0; i < nr_hugefiles; i++) {
>> + unlink(hugepg_tbl[i].filepath);
>> + hugepg_tbl[i].orig_va = NULL;
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Michael
>
> Actually, I don't think that's quite right.
>
> http://linux.die.net/man/2/unlink
>
> "On success, zero is returned. On error, -1 is returned, and errno is set
> appropriately." So it should be returning an error, and logging a message for
> a file it cannot unlink or people will be surprised with weird failures.
>
> It also had some minor typos / English in the comments but we can fix that
> too.
>
> Matthew.
>
>
Thank you Michael & Matthew
I will fix it.
:)
--
Regards,
Haifeng
