> -----Original Message----- > From: Andy Green [mailto:a...@warmcat.com] > Sent: Friday, May 18, 2018 4:42 PM > To: Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.j...@nxp.com>; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 01/21] lib/librte_ethdev: change eth- > dev-ops API to return int > > > > On 05/18/2018 06:59 PM, Shreyansh Jain wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Andy Green > >> Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2018 7:19 PM > >> To: dev@dpdk.org > >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 01/21] lib/librte_ethdev: change eth- > dev- > >> ops API to return int > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Andy Green <a...@warmcat.com> > >> --- > >> drivers/net/ark/ark_ethdev_rx.c | 4 ++-- > >> drivers/net/ark/ark_ethdev_rx.h | 3 +-- > >> drivers/net/avf/avf_rxtx.c | 4 ++-- > >> drivers/net/avf/avf_rxtx.h | 2 +- > >> drivers/net/bnxt/bnxt_ethdev.c | 5 +++-- > >> drivers/net/dpaa/dpaa_ethdev.c | 4 ++-- > >> drivers/net/dpaa2/dpaa2_ethdev.c | 6 +++--- > >> drivers/net/e1000/e1000_ethdev.h | 6 ++---- > >> drivers/net/e1000/em_rxtx.c | 4 ++-- > >> drivers/net/e1000/igb_rxtx.c | 4 ++-- > >> drivers/net/enic/enic_ethdev.c | 9 +++------ > >> drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx.c | 4 ++-- > >> drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx.h | 3 +-- > >> drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_ethdev.h | 3 +-- > >> drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c | 4 ++-- > >> drivers/net/nfp/nfp_net.c | 9 ++++----- > >> drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ethdev.c | 4 ++-- > >> drivers/net/thunderx/nicvf_ethdev.c | 2 +- > >> drivers/net/thunderx/nicvf_rxtx.c | 4 ++-- > >> drivers/net/thunderx/nicvf_rxtx.h | 2 +- > >> drivers/net/vhost/rte_eth_vhost.c | 4 ++-- > >> examples/l3fwd-power/main.c | 2 +- > >> lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_core.h | 4 ++-- > >> 23 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) > >> > > > > [...] > > > >> rxq = dev->data->rx_queues[rx_queue_id]; > >> diff --git a/drivers/net/dpaa/dpaa_ethdev.c > >> b/drivers/net/dpaa/dpaa_ethdev.c > >> index d014a11aa..70a5b4851 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/net/dpaa/dpaa_ethdev.c > >> +++ b/drivers/net/dpaa/dpaa_ethdev.c > >> @@ -725,7 +725,7 @@ static void dpaa_eth_tx_queue_release(void *txq > >> __rte_unused) > >> PMD_INIT_FUNC_TRACE(); > >> } > >> > >> -static uint32_t > >> +static int > >> dpaa_dev_rx_queue_count(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, uint16_t > rx_queue_id) > >> { > >> struct dpaa_if *dpaa_intf = dev->data->dev_private; > >> @@ -738,7 +738,7 @@ dpaa_dev_rx_queue_count(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, > >> uint16_t rx_queue_id) > >> RTE_LOG(DEBUG, PMD, "RX frame count for q(%d) is %u\n", > >> rx_queue_id, frm_cnt); > >> } > >> - return frm_cnt; > >> + return (int)frm_cnt; > >> } > >> > >> static int dpaa_link_down(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) > >> diff --git a/drivers/net/dpaa2/dpaa2_ethdev.c > >> b/drivers/net/dpaa2/dpaa2_ethdev.c > >> index 9297725d9..eb6245b83 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/net/dpaa2/dpaa2_ethdev.c > >> +++ b/drivers/net/dpaa2/dpaa2_ethdev.c > >> @@ -604,7 +604,7 @@ dpaa2_dev_tx_queue_release(void *q __rte_unused) > >> PMD_INIT_FUNC_TRACE(); > >> } > >> > >> -static uint32_t > >> +static int > >> dpaa2_dev_rx_queue_count(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, uint16_t > >> rx_queue_id) > >> { > >> int32_t ret; > >> @@ -612,7 +612,7 @@ dpaa2_dev_rx_queue_count(struct rte_eth_dev > *dev, > >> uint16_t rx_queue_id) > >> struct dpaa2_queue *dpaa2_q; > >> struct qbman_swp *swp; > >> struct qbman_fq_query_np_rslt state; > >> - uint32_t frame_cnt = 0; > >> + int frame_cnt = 0; > >> > >> PMD_INIT_FUNC_TRACE(); > >> > >> @@ -628,7 +628,7 @@ dpaa2_dev_rx_queue_count(struct rte_eth_dev > *dev, > >> uint16_t rx_queue_id) > >> dpaa2_q = (struct dpaa2_queue *)priv->rx_vq[rx_queue_id]; > >> > >> if (qbman_fq_query_state(swp, dpaa2_q->fqid, &state) == 0) { > >> - frame_cnt = qbman_fq_state_frame_count(&state); > >> + frame_cnt = (int)qbman_fq_state_frame_count(&state); > >> DPAA2_PMD_DEBUG("RX frame count for q(%d) is %u", > >> rx_queue_id, frame_cnt); > >> } > > > > This doesn't feel correct. A counter, especially the number of > descriptors in a queue, doesn't have a negative value. So, 1) this is > an unnatural return and 2) we litter the code with unnecessary > typecast. > > > > In fact, even in the above change, the debug messages continue to > print unsigned values. So, another typecast would be required there. > > > > I don't agree with this change - at least not until some strong gcc 8 > warning reason is triggering this. Can you please point me to some > conversation on mailing list which enforces this? > > > > hmmmmm.... no, it's not my idea. > > If you don't like it, don't do it, I don't mind either way. I sent a > patch that just solved the compiler error only already, and was told on > the list it would be cooler if these things returned an int instead. > > There's no point challenging me about the wisdom of it, although it > seems reasonable to me. I sent a patch, list guy $1 says do X instead, > I do X and then list guy $2 says EXPLAIN YOURSELF.
That is what a community is. Consensus has to be built, not expected automagically. If you touch a line, you are responsible for it (also, because in future git blame would point *you* out for a change). > > I really don't care, $1 should argue with $2 and leave me out of it. I was expecting that you point me out to where the $1 conversation was - so that I could have understood reason for your change. You didn’t do that and rather went into a tangential conversation. I will not be searching through your previous patches and conversations to understand why $1 said something and you *agreed* to go ahead and make changes. > > If I don't hear anything more I'll reissue with just the minimal change > later. > > -Andy
