On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 11:12 AM Gaetan Rivet <gr...@u256.net> wrote:
>
> The original triple negative was hard to read and the attempt
> to improve the formulation was commendable, unfortunately the new
> comment is the inverse of correct.
>
> Fixes: a65a34a85ebf ("eal: replace usage of blacklist/whitelist in enums")
> Cc: step...@networkplumber.org
> Signed-off-by: Gaetan Rivet <gr...@u256.net>
> ---
>
> No Cc:stable as it was not yet released.
>
> drivers/bus/pci/pci_common.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/bus/pci/pci_common.c b/drivers/bus/pci/pci_common.c
> index b24c069713..d55e5a38cf 100644
> --- a/drivers/bus/pci/pci_common.c
> +++ b/drivers/bus/pci/pci_common.c
> @@ -68,7 +68,9 @@ pci_name_set(struct rte_pci_device *dev)
> devargs = pci_devargs_lookup(&dev->addr);
> dev->device.devargs = devargs;
>
> - /* If the device is blocked, no rte_devargs exists for it. */
> + /* When using a block-list, only blocked devices will have
Nit: I don't think we need a -, I would go with blocklist.
> + * an rte_devargs. Allowed devices won't have one.
> + */
> if (devargs != NULL)
> /* If an rte_devargs exists, the generic rte_device uses the
> * given name as its name.
> --
> 2.29.2
>
Reviewed-by: David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com>
--
David Marchand
