[dpdk-dev,2/2] net/bnxt: fix arguments to _rte_eth_dev_callback_process
Checks
Commit Message
The callback arguments to _rte_eth_dev_callback_process() are swapped.
Fix them.
Fixes: d6af1a13d7a1 ("ethdev: add return values to callback process API")
Signed-off-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
---
drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Comments
On 7/25/2017 4:32 AM, Ajit Khaparde wrote:
> The callback arguments to _rte_eth_dev_callback_process() are swapped.
> Fix them.
>
> Fixes: d6af1a13d7a1 ("ethdev: add return values to callback process API")
>
> Signed-off-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c b/drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c
> index dd7e5b8..0463373 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c
> @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ int bnxt_rcv_msg_from_vf(struct bnxt *bp, uint16_t vf_id, void *msg)
> cb_param.msg = msg;
>
> _rte_eth_dev_callback_process(bp->eth_dev, RTE_ETH_EVENT_VF_MBOX,
> - &cb_param, NULL);
> + NULL, &cb_param);
Hi Ajit,
Since you are using "cb_param.retval", change looks good.
But it is easy to confuse between cb_param and ret_param. To clarify
your intention, I suggest renaming "cb_param" to "ret_param", does it
make sense?
Thanks,
ferruh
>
> /* Default to approve */
> if (cb_param.retval == RTE_PMD_BNXT_MB_EVENT_PROCEED)
>
On 7/31/2017 12:19 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 7/25/2017 4:32 AM, Ajit Khaparde wrote:
>> The callback arguments to _rte_eth_dev_callback_process() are swapped.
>> Fix them.
>>
>> Fixes: d6af1a13d7a1 ("ethdev: add return values to callback process API")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c b/drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c
>> index dd7e5b8..0463373 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/bnxt/rte_pmd_bnxt.c
>> @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ int bnxt_rcv_msg_from_vf(struct bnxt *bp, uint16_t vf_id, void *msg)
>> cb_param.msg = msg;
>>
>> _rte_eth_dev_callback_process(bp->eth_dev, RTE_ETH_EVENT_VF_MBOX,
>> - &cb_param, NULL);
>> + NULL, &cb_param);
>
> Hi Ajit,
>
>
> Since you are using "cb_param.retval", change looks good.
>
> But it is easy to confuse between cb_param and ret_param. To clarify
> your intention, I suggest renaming "cb_param" to "ret_param", does it
> make sense?
I got other patch in the set, they are not related and to save some work
for you, can you please send a new version of just this patch?
>
> Thanks,
> ferruh
>
>>
>> /* Default to approve */
>> if (cb_param.retval == RTE_PMD_BNXT_MB_EVENT_PROCEED)
>>
>
@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ int bnxt_rcv_msg_from_vf(struct bnxt *bp, uint16_t vf_id, void *msg)
cb_param.msg = msg;
_rte_eth_dev_callback_process(bp->eth_dev, RTE_ETH_EVENT_VF_MBOX,
- &cb_param, NULL);
+ NULL, &cb_param);
/* Default to approve */
if (cb_param.retval == RTE_PMD_BNXT_MB_EVENT_PROCEED)