>From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
>On Behalf Of [email protected]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 5:01 PM
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: [ovs-dev] [PATCH v5 4/6] netdev-dpdk: assert mempool names.
>
>Replace if statement with an assert.
>
>CC: Darrell Ball <[email protected]>
>CC: Ciara Loftus <[email protected]>
>CC: Kevin Traynor <[email protected]>
>CC: Aaron Conole <[email protected]>
>Signed-off-by: Antonio Fischetti <[email protected]>
Hey Antonio,
As per my previous comments, I believe that this patch should not be included
in the patchset.
Other than that, two comments inline below.
Thanks,
Mark
>---
> lib/netdev-dpdk.c | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/lib/netdev-dpdk.c b/lib/netdev-dpdk.c
>index 2aa4a55..c451bc9 100644
>--- a/lib/netdev-dpdk.c
>+++ b/lib/netdev-dpdk.c
>@@ -501,9 +501,7 @@ dpdk_mp_name(struct dpdk_mp *dmp)
> char *mp_name = xcalloc(RTE_MEMPOOL_NAMESIZE, sizeof *mp_name);
> int ret = snprintf(mp_name, RTE_MEMPOOL_NAMESIZE, "ovs_%x_%d_%d_%u",
> h, dmp->socket_id, dmp->mtu, dmp->mp_size);
>- if (ret < 0 || ret >= RTE_MEMPOOL_NAMESIZE) {
>- return NULL;
>- }
>+ ovs_assert(ret >= 0 && ret < RTE_MEMPOOL_NAMESIZE);
The behavior of ovs_assert in the event of failure is to abort execution - are
you sure that's what you want to happen here?
In the previous implementation, NULL was returned, and execution continued; are
there some undesired side effects of same that you're trying to avoid with this
change?
> return mp_name;
> }
>
>--
>2.4.11
>
>_______________________________________________
>dev mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
