On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Bill Fischofer <[email protected]> wrote: > This is clearly orthogonal to this patch series. Ideally you should > (a) Create a Bug to represent this, (b) Post the fix patch noting the > Bug URL in the commit log, and (c) update the Bug entry with the URL > of the patch that fixes this bug. > > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 1:47 PM, Brian Brooks <[email protected]> wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Kevin Wang <[email protected]> >> Reviewed-by: Ola Liljedahl <[email protected]> >> Reviewed-by: Brian Brooks <[email protected]> >> --- >> platform/linux-generic/pktio/loop.c | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/platform/linux-generic/pktio/loop.c >> b/platform/linux-generic/pktio/loop.c >> index 70962839..49d8a211 100644 >> --- a/platform/linux-generic/pktio/loop.c >> +++ b/platform/linux-generic/pktio/loop.c >> @@ -176,6 +176,7 @@ static int loopback_send(pktio_entry_t *pktio_entry, int >> index ODP_UNUSED, >> pktio_entry->s.stats.out_octets += bytes; >> } else { >> ODP_DBG("queue enqueue failed %i\n", ret); >> + odp_ticketlock_unlock(&pktio_entry->s.txl); >> return -1; > > A better fix to this is to just delete the return -1 since that will > result in the following unlock being executed and ret being returned > as the return code from this routine.
Correction, change return -1 to ret = -1 since the test on the if if (ret > 0) and we want to return a negative if ret = 0 from odp_enqueue_multi(). > >> } >> >> -- >> 2.12.2 >>
