2016-01-21 20:02, Jan Viktorin: > On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:57:10 +0100 > David Marchand <david.marchand at 6wind.com> wrote: > > - if ((name == NULL) || (pci_dev == NULL)) > > - return -EINVAL; > > Do you use a kind of assert in DPDK? The patch looks OK, however, I > would prefer something like > > assert_not_null(name); > assert_not_null(pci_dev); > > Usually, if some outer code is broken by mistake, the assert catches > such an issue. At the same time, it documents the code by telling > "this must never be NULL here". I agree, that returning -EINVAL for > this kind of check is incorrect. > > Same for other changes...
For this patch, I agree to remove useless checks. For the other checks, EINVAL seems to be the right error code. And yes you are right, we could replace most of EINVAL returns by a kind of assert. RTE_VERIFY would be appropriate.
