Hello Don,
On Monday 09 October 2017 11:51 PM, Don Provan wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Shreyansh Jain [mailto:shreyansh.j...@nxp.com]
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2017 4:10 AM
To: Jan Blunck <jblu...@infradead.org>; Thomas Monjalon
<tho...@monjalon.net>
Cc: dev <dev@dpdk.org>; Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agra...@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal: bus scan and probe never fail
...
This is where I have disagreement/doubt.
Reporting error code from rte_bus_scan would do two things:
1. rte_eal_init is not designed to ignore/log-only these errors - it
would quit initialization. (But, this can be changed)
2. What should rte_eal_init do with this error? rte_bus_scan would have
already printed the problematic bus->scan() failure.
These practical problems confirm to me that the failure of a bus
scan is more of a strategic issue: when asking "which devices can
I use?", "none" is a perfectly valid answer that does not seem
like an error to me even when a failed bus scan is the reason for
that answer.
I agree with this.
From the application's point of view, the potential error here
is that the device it wants to use isn't available. I don't see that
either the init function or the probe function will have enough
information to understand that application-level problem, so
they should leave it to the application to detect it.
I think I understand you comment but just want to cross check again:
Scan or probe error should simply be ignored by EAL layer and let the
application take stance when it detects that the device it was looking
for is missing. Is my understanding correct?
I am trying to come a conclusion so that this patch can either be
modified or pushed as it is. If the above understanding is correct, I
don't see any changes required in the patch.
-don provan
dpro...@bivio.net
