[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] ethdev: add return code to rte_eth_stats_reset()
ferruh.yigit at intel.com
Wed Sep 20 18:55:49 CEST 2017
On 9/20/2017 3:01 PM, David Harton (dharton) wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yigit at intel.com]
>> On 9/1/2017 3:26 AM, David Harton wrote:
>>> Some devices do not support reset of eth stats. An application may
>>> need to know not to clear shadow stats if the device cannot.
>>> rte_eth_stats_reset is updated to provide a return code to share
>>> whether the device supports reset or not.
>>> Signed-off-by: David Harton <dharton at cisco.com>
>>> * squashed doc patch
>>> * moved rel_note change from ABI to API section
>>> * commented return values
>>> * overcame noob errors and figured out patch challenged
>>> * fixed soft tab issue inserted while moving changes
>>> doc/guides/rel_notes/release_17_11.rst | 13 +++++++++++++
>>> lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c | 8 +++++---
>>> lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h | 6 +++++-
>>> 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>> diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_17_11.rst
>>> index 22df4fd..6282667 100644
>>> --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_17_11.rst
>>> +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_17_11.rst
>>> @@ -110,6 +110,19 @@ API Changes
>>> Also, make sure to start the actual text at the margin.
>>> +* **Modified the return type of rte_eth_stats_reset.**
>>> + Changed return type of ``rte_eth_stats_reset`` from ``void`` to
>>> + ``int`` so the caller may know whether a device supports the
>>> + operation or not and if the operation was carried out.
>>> +* **Modified the vlan_offload_set_t function prototype in the ethdev
>>> + Changed the function prototype of ``vlan_offload_set_t``. The
>>> + return value has been changed from ``void`` to ``int`` so the
>>> + caller to knows whether the backing device supports the operation
>>> + or if the operation was successfully performed.
>> Is this addition to the document related to this patch?
> Good catch. No. :(
> I must have mishandled the rebase I did to update this patch. V6 coming.
> Would be great if you could re-ACK afterwards so this one can move.
I think you can carry the previous Ack for this case. Since main part of
the patch that acked will not be changed...
More information about the dev