2016-01-21 19:06, David Marchand:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Jan Viktorin <viktorin at rehivetech.com>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:57:11 +0100
> > David Marchand <david.marchand at 6wind.com> wrote:
> >
> [snip]
> >> @@ -612,14 +599,25 @@ int
> >> rte_eth_dev_attach(const char *devargs, uint8_t *port_id)
> >> {
> >> struct rte_pci_addr addr;
> >> + int ret = -1;
> >>
> >> if ((devargs == NULL) || (port_id == NULL))
> >> - return -EINVAL;
> >> + goto err;
> >
> > This change modifies the return value from -EINVAL to -1. I don't know
> > whether is this an issue but it looks suspicious.
>
> Should not be an issue, as the api does not give details on expected
> negative return values.
> Just noticed, this also introduces a new log message that was not
> displayed before.
>
> To be safe, I suppose I should restore this.
>
> Thomas, opinion ?
I'm OK with the log message added for this error case.
I would just keep the -EINVAL return value.
Other nit: you are allowed to fix the (moved) log message.
