+ // init succeeded, so we do not need to do it again later.
+ is_dpdk_pre_inited = 1;
+ return 1;
+
+error:
+ switch (-is_dpdk_pre_inited)
+ {
+ case EACCES:
+ // This "indicates a permissions issue.".
+ RTE_LOG(ERR, USER1, "%s\n", DPDK_ERR_PERM_MSG);
+ // If we were told to treat this as just meaning
+ // DPDK isn't available, do so.
+ if (eaccess_not_fatal)
+ return 0;
+ // Otherwise report a fatal error.
+ snprintf(ebuf, PCAP_ERRBUF_SIZE,
+ "DPDK requires that it run as root");
+ return PCAP_ERROR_PERM_DENIED;
+
+ case EAGAIN:
+ // This "indicates either a bus or system
+ // resource was not available, setup may
+ // be attempted again."
+ // There's no such error in pcap, so I'm
+ // not sure what we should do here.
+ snprintf(ebuf, PCAP_ERRBUF_SIZE,
+ "Bus or system resource was not available");
+ break;
+
+ case EALREADY:
+ // This "indicates that the rte_eal_init
+ // function has already been called, and
+ // cannot be called again."
+ // That's not an error; set the "we've
+ // been here before" flag and return
+ // success.
+ is_dpdk_pre_inited = 1;
+ return 1;
+
+ case EFAULT:
+ // This "indicates the tailq configuration
+ // name was not found in memory configuration."
+ snprintf(ebuf, PCAP_ERRBUF_SIZE,
+ "The tailq configuration name was not found in the memory configuration");
+ return PCAP_ERROR;
+
+ case EINVAL:
+ // This "indicates invalid parameters were
+ // passed as argv/argc." Those came from
+ // the configuration file.
+ snprintf(ebuf, PCAP_ERRBUF_SIZE,
+ "The configuration file has invalid parameters");
+ break;
+
+ case ENOMEM:
+ // This "indicates failure likely caused by
+ // an out-of-memory condition."
+ snprintf(ebuf, PCAP_ERRBUF_SIZE,
+ "Out of memory");
+ break;
+
+ case ENODEV:
+ // This "indicates memory setup issues."
+ snprintf(ebuf, PCAP_ERRBUF_SIZE,
+ "An error occurred setting up memory");
+ break;
+
+ case ENOTSUP:
+ // This "indicates that the EAL cannot
+ // initialize on this system." We treat
+ // that as meaning DPDK isn't available
+ // on this machine, rather than as a
+ // fatal error, and let our caller decide
+ // whether that's a fatal error (if trying
+ // to activate a DPDK device) or not (if
+ // trying to enumerate devices).
+ return 0;
+
+ case EPROTO:
+ // This "indicates that the PCI bus is
+ // either not present, or is not readable
+ // by the eal." Does "the PCI bus is not
+ // present" mean "this machine has no PCI
+ // bus", which strikes me as a "not available"
+ // case? If so, should "is not readable by
+ // the EAL" also something we should treat
+ // as a "not available" case? If not, we
+ // can't distinguish between the two, so
+ // we're stuck.
+ snprintf(ebuf, PCAP_ERRBUF_SIZE,
+ "PCI bus is not present or not readable by the EAL");
+ break;
+
+ case ENOEXEC:
+ // This "indicates that a service core
+ // failed to launch successfully."
+ snprintf(ebuf, PCAP_ERRBUF_SIZE,
+ "A service core failed to launch successfully");
+ break;
+
+ default:
+ //
+ // That's not in the list of errors in
+ // the documentation; let it be reported
+ // as an error.
+ //
+ dpdk_fmt_errmsg_for_rte_errno(ebuf,
+ PCAP_ERRBUF_SIZE, -is_dpdk_pre_inited,
+ "dpdk error: dpdk_pre_init failed");
+ break;
+ }
+ // Error.
+ return PCAP_ERROR;
projects / libpcap / blobdiff