> -----Original Message----- > From: Burakov, Anatoly > Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 12:26 PM > To: Ananyev, Konstantin <[email protected]>; Tan, Jianfeng > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Cc: Richardson, Bruce <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] eal: add synchronous multi-process communication > > On 25-Jan-18 12:19 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Burakov, Anatoly > >> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 12:00 PM > >> To: Tan, Jianfeng <[email protected]>; [email protected] > >> Cc: Richardson, Bruce <[email protected]>; Ananyev, Konstantin > >> <[email protected]>; [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] eal: add synchronous multi-process > >> communication > >> > >> On the overall patch, > >> > >> Reviewed-by: Anatoly Burakov <[email protected]> > >> > >> For request(), returning number of replies received actually makes > >> sense, because now we get use the value to read our replies, if we were > >> a primary process sending messages to secondary processes. > > > > Yes, I also think it is good to return number of sends. > > Then caller can compare number of sended requests with number of > > received replies and decide should it be considered a failure or no. > > > > Well, OK, that might make sense. However, i think it would've be of more > value to make the API consistent (0/-1 on success/failure) and put > number of sent messages into the reply, like number of received. I.e. > something like > > struct reply { > int nb_sent; > int nb_received; > }; > > We do it for the latter already, so why not the former?
The question is what treat as success/failure? Let say we sent 2 requests (of 3 possible), got back 1 response... Should we consider it as success or failure?
