> -----Original Message-----
> From: Burakov, Anatoly
> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2018 12:26 PM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; Tan, Jianfeng
> <jianfeng....@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net
> 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 <jianfeng....@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> >> Cc: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
> >> <konstantin.anan...@intel.com>; tho...@monjalon.net
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] eal: add synchronous multi-process
> >> communication
> >>
> >> On the overall patch,
> >>
> >> Reviewed-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.bura...@intel.com>
> >>
> >> 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?
