2017-03-07 09:29, Billy McFall: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 8:48 AM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monja...@6wind.com> > wrote: > > I think you could use rte_errno (while keeping negative return codes). > > > > I can do that if you want, but if I understand your comment, it will make > the implementation of the function not as clean. I cannot use the existing > RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(..) and RTE_FUNC_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(..) MACROs > because they are handling the return on error. Or am I missing something?
Yes. Maybe we need new macros for basic error management with rte_errno.
