2015-08-02 22:04, Matthew Hall:
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 09:46:54AM +0800, Liang, Cunming wrote:
> > According to the API definition, if the socket could not be determined, a
> > default of zero will take.
> > The '-1' is returned when the port_id value is out of range.
>
> Yes, but when I asked
Hi,
On 8/1/2015 11:56 AM, Matthew Hall wrote:
> I asked about this many months ago and was informed that "-1" is a "standard
> error value" that I should expect from these APIs when NUMA is not present.
> Now we're saying I have to change my code again to handle a zero value?
>
> Also not sure
On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 09:46:54AM +0800, Liang, Cunming wrote:
> According to the API definition, if the socket could not be determined, a
> default of zero will take.
> The '-1' is returned when the port_id value is out of range.
Yes, but when I asked the exact same question and was told the
I asked about this many months ago and was informed that "-1" is a "standard
error value" that I should expect from these APIs when NUMA is not present.
Now we're saying I have to change my code again to handle a zero value?
Also not sure how to tell the difference between no NUMA, something
The patch sets zero as the default value of pci device numa_node
if the socket could not be determined.
It provides the same default value as FreeBSD which has no NUMA support,
and makes the return value of rte_eth_dev_socket_id() be consistent
with the API description.
Signed-off-by: Cunming
5 matches
Mail list logo
