[PATCH 1/5] eal: add lcore set name and get name API

[Tyler Retzlaff]

On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 01:03:41PM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Wed,  7 Dec 2022 11:00:13 -0800
> Tyler Retzlaff <roretzla at linux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> 
> > +static char lcore_names[RTE_MAX_LCORE][RTE_LCORE_NAME_MAX_LEN];
> 
> This copy would redundant on Linux.
> 
> > +
> > +int
> > +rte_lcore_set_name(unsigned int lcore_id, const char *name)
> > +{
> > +	if (unlikely(lcore_id >= RTE_MAX_LCORE))
> > +		return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > +	if (strlen(name) >= RTE_LCORE_NAME_MAX_LEN)
> > +		return -ERANGE;
> > +
> > +	(void)strcpy(&lcore_names[lcore_id][0], name);
> 
> Why the void cast?

it's a common convention used in various open source projects indicating
the that ignoring the return value is intentional as opposed to being
sloppy or accidental.

if it's a violation of dpdk style i'll remove it. but i have come across
a lot of dpdk code where i honestly can't tell if it is on purpose or
just sloppyness. (sticks out in code reviews too).