It's been a source of confusion in the past, and even with this update
may continue to be a source of confusion. However, the original
language seems to imply that the DPDK EAL will take ownership of the
array passed in. Loosening the language up a bit might give a better
understanding for what is actually happening.
Signed-off-by: Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>
* This behavior may change in the future.
*
* @param argc
* This behavior may change in the future.
*
* @param argc
- * The argc argument that was given to the main() function.
+ * A non-negative value. If it is greater than 0, the array members
+ * for argv[0] through argv[argc] (non-inclusive) shall contain pointers
+ * to strings.
- * The argv argument that was given to the main() function.
+ * An array of strings. The contents of the array, as well as the strings
+ * which are pointed to by the array, may be modified by this function.
* @return
* - On success, the number of parsed arguments, which is greater or
* equal to zero. After the call to rte_eal_init(),
* @return
* - On success, the number of parsed arguments, which is greater or
* equal to zero. After the call to rte_eal_init(),
- * all arguments argv[x] with x < ret may be modified and should
- * not be accessed by the application.
+ * all arguments argv[x] with x < ret may have been modified by this
+ * function call and should not be further interpreted by the
+ * application. The EAL does not take any ownership of the memory used
+ * for either the argv array, or its members.
* - On failure, a negative error value.
*/
int rte_eal_init(int argc, char **argv);
* - On failure, a negative error value.
*/
int rte_eal_init(int argc, char **argv);