On 8 April 2015 at 12:45, Zoltan Kiss <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Now it looks like:
>
> * @retval 1 packet has errors
> * @retval 0 packet has no errors
>
> I found it is better for debugging if it actually returns some error code.
> How about changing it to:
>
> * @retval 0 packet has no errors
> * @retval !0 packet has errors, implementation can optionally return an
> error code
>
This looks like it was intended to be a boolean test so extra info might be
misleading, and to be a standard people can rely on optional is never a
good thing.
Is there a minimum set of errors this api can be said will return an error
code for ? If there is no standard set at all I question having anything
optional becasue the api will have no portability at all.
Taken from the hdr in question it looks like it would be this list
struct {
/* Bitfield flags for each detected error */
uint32_t app_error:1; /**< Error bit for application use */
uint32_t frame_len:1; /**< Frame length error */
uint32_t snap_len:1; /**< Snap length error */
uint32_t l2_chksum:1; /**< L2 checksum error, checks TBD */
uint32_t ip_err:1; /**< IP error, checks TBD */
uint32_t tcp_err:1; /**< TCP error, checks TBD */
uint32_t udp_err:1; /**< UDP error, checks TBD */
};
} error_flags_t;
>
> Zoli
> _______________________________________________
> lng-odp mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
>
--
Mike Holmes
Technical Manager - Linaro Networking Group
Linaro.org <http://www.linaro.org/> *│ *Open source software for ARM SoCs
_______________________________________________
lng-odp mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
