23/08/2017 14:18, David Harton (dharton): > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:tho...@monjalon.net] > > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 3:52 AM > > To: David Harton (dharton) <dhar...@cisco.com> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ethdev: stop overriding rx_nombuf by > > rte_eth_stats_get > > > > 23/08/2017 04:55, David Harton: > > > rte_eth_stats_get() unconditonally would set rx_nombuf even if the > > > device was setting the value. A check has been added in > > > rte_eth_stats_get() to leave the device value in-tact when non-zero. > > > > If we get this counter from stats->rx_nombuf, why keeping > > dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed ? > > We could rework other PMDs to not use this global variable. > > It is inconsistent to use it for some PMDs but not all. > > And it seems not used outside of PMDs. > > Are you also asking to remove dev->data->rx_mbuf_alloc_failed as well since > we will have an ABI breakage anyway?
Not asking, just giving my thought :) > On an somewhat related note, since we are introducing an ABI breakage how do > you feel about re-adding the return code for the vlan_offload_set vector? > Some devices conditionally provide the ability to modify some offload and the > caller should know. Since I've got your attention thought I'd ask here > before posting the patch. Seems reasonnable > <soapbox> > In fact, I believe all the API function calls should provide a return code to > help mitigate ABI breakages and also provide the ability to let the caller > distinguish between - no device, not supported and some other error. A > control plane often needs to understand these distinctions to properly > orchestrate the system and/or report real errors. This is more than I'm > willing to take on myself but believe it's a principle I'd like to discuss > (can start separate thread if desired). > </soapbox> Yes you're right
