15/10/2020 04:56, Bing Zhao:
> From: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>
> > 08/10/2020 14:05, Bing Zhao:
> > > +int
> > > +rte_eth_hairpin_bind(uint16_t tx_port, uint16_t rx_port) {
> > > + struct rte_eth_dev *dev;
> > > + int ret;
> > > +
> > > + RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(tx_port, -EINVAL);
> >
> > It should be -ENODEV
>
> Got it, changed. BTW, I checked the ethdev and it seems some functions are
> using "EINVAL" and some are using "ENODEV". So should all of these functions
> use "ENODEV"?
Yes there is a patch pending to return ENODEV everywhere:
https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/80568/
