[dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] ethdev: avoid error on PCI unplug of already closed ethdev

Ferruh Yigit ferruh.yigit at intel.com
Wed Jul 3 15:55:57 CEST 2019


On 7/2/2019 6:38 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 6/21/2019 11:15 AM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
>> On 6/21/19 12:52 PM, David Marchand wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 11:41 AM Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko at solarflare.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> If PCI Ethernet device driver removes it on close
>>>> (RTE_ETH_DEV_CLOSE_REMOVE) and later PCI device itself is unplugged,
>>>> it should not fail because of Ethernet device is already removed.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 23ea57a2a0ce ("ethdev: complete closing of port")
>>>> Cc: stable at dpdk.org
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko at solarflare.com>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Ivan Malov <ivan.malov at oktetlabs.ru>
>>>> ---
>>>> Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas at monjalon.net>
>>>> Cc: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit at intel.com>
>>>>
>>>>   lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h | 2 +-
>>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h
>>>> b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h
>>>> index 23257e986..ccdbb46ec 100644
>>>> --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h
>>>> +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h
>>>> @@ -184,7 +184,7 @@ rte_eth_dev_pci_generic_remove(struct rte_pci_device
>>>> *pci_dev,
>>>>
>>>>          eth_dev = rte_eth_dev_allocated(pci_dev->device.name);
>>>>          if (!eth_dev)
>>>> -               return -ENODEV;
>>>> +               return 0;
>>>>
>>>>          if (dev_uninit) {
>>>>                  ret = dev_uninit(eth_dev);
>>>> --
>>>> 2.17.1
>>>>
>>> We are changing the behavior for all drivers, while I understand this
>>> should apply to the ones that have the RTE_ETH_DEV_CLOSE_REMOVE flag.
>>> Btw, I had reported this earlier [1], care to add a little Reported-by for
>>> me ? :-)
>>
>> Yes, I agree. Unfortunately there is no ethdev here to check
>> RTE_ETH_DEV_CLOSE_REMOVE. It could be PCI driver flag for the
>> feature, but I'm not sure if it makes sense to add one more
>> flag for transition.
>>
>>> 1: http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2019-June/134150.html
> 
> Reported-by: David Marchand <david.marchand at redhat.com>
> 
>>
> 
> Acked-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit at intel.com>
> 

Series applied to dpdk-next-net/master, thanks.


More information about the stable mailing list