On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Andrew Yourtchenko <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Jon,
>
> On 10 Nov 2017, at 23:11, Jon Loeliger <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> Every error from the ACL implementation is -1.  Generically bad.
> Without regard for what might be more useful to an upper-layer UI.
>
>
> When we discussed with the openstack folks the way they are treating
> errors was all as catastrophic, but yes more distinction would be better,
> so thanks a lot for taking care of it!
>

Happy to try to help. :-)

So I submitted a patch to help this situation some.
> https://gerrit.fd.io/r/#/c/9383/
>
> I have built and tested it locally, but it fails the Verify Tests because
> it has a test that is expecting a hard-coded -1 return from some tests.
> Returning a -6 wasn't good enough.
>
> First, this is draconian for no really good reason.  Second, it should be
> fixed.  Third, I would do that except I am stupid and need a clue where
> or how to fix this situation so the tests are less draconian.  (Can we
> get a "less than 0" test instead of "equal to -1"?)
>
>
> Yeah. So we would need to first submit new test(s) that pass on both
> current and new code and then the new code itself... wanna take a shot at
> it  or should I ?
>

I don't even know where I would begin on that front, except
to say the test should maybe be " actual < 0" for now.

> Oh, and, it's pretty clear why the Verify failed, despite the Jenkins job
> saying it was unable to determine a cause.  Um, double blerg.
>
>
> Alas, this one I leave to someone else to comment on :)
>

I hear that!

jdl
_______________________________________________
vpp-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev

Reply via email to