Hi Pavan, > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-boun...@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Pavan Nikhilesh > Sent: Wednesday, June 7, 2017 11:37 AM > To: dev@dpdk.org > Cc: Doherty, Declan <declan.dohe...@intel.com>; Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula > <pbhagavat...@caviumnetworks.com> > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] cryptodev: fix cryptodev start return value > > From: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula <pbhagavat...@caviumnetworks.com> > > If cryptodev has already started it should return -EBUSY instead of 0 > when rte_cryptodev_start is called. > > Fixes: d11b0f30df88 ("cryptodev: introduce API and framework for crypto > devices") > > Signed-off-by: Pavan Nikhilesh <pbhagavat...@caviumnetworks.com> > --- > lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c > b/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c > index b65cd9c..c815038 100644 > --- a/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c > +++ b/lib/librte_cryptodev/rte_cryptodev.c > @@ -1000,7 +1000,7 @@ rte_cryptodev_start(uint8_t dev_id) > if (dev->data->dev_started != 0) { > CDEV_LOG_ERR("Device with dev_id=%" PRIu8 " already started", > dev_id); > - return 0; > + return -EBUSY; It makes sense to me to return 0/success in this case, as the end result is the same, the device is successfully started. But I don't feel strongly about it if there's a good argument for making the change? However, as it is an API change doesn't it need to be flagged in a release before the change is made?
} > > diag = (*dev->dev_ops->dev_start)(dev); > -- > 2.7.4
