From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f181.google.com (mail-wi0-f181.google.com [209.85.212.181]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B98233B5 for ; Wed, 4 Mar 2015 11:29:11 +0100 (CET) Received: by wiwh11 with SMTP id h11so29527178wiw.3 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2015 02:29:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index :content-language; bh=cn6PnxX9v4Mm6oDsweyqCoCqU/cdqDGBxj6P+q3zwCA=; b=JN7eUbkVyQxQ2O7Qj5uQiFcvceAHpbQ3Ima1YN31HNGlecA+2e/oEChLQIHPpaN/Fm E2wlRocV+OMMx7cLLd+908i4vlpJCN/LI2gIXG2LYU0uuoCLrigcTDgBqxm6YahYcugU UmVLq+AGiKLpmMyI3N7cZdSuVp6y1lPpZ5dt89t08+wT+BjeXM6A0rBea+i/0jLdSWLN x1q72DWNs7EPjEU1jCuNiNStlVpR4fp2hESCgA4Xpx7XlLtHvs0Rglx129In233jyQ1i CSweBZoeE+JTBo8pkjLaw7hYplud0OaAdpdue9rtZHKhBSm4yysF7JP9vL/83bRlk+8D 5gAA== X-Received: by 10.180.149.205 with SMTP id uc13mr11619509wib.0.1425464951658; Wed, 04 Mar 2015 02:29:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from laptop1 (84.95.210.61.forward.012.net.il. [84.95.210.61]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id n3sm5288730wja.36.2015.03.04.02.29.10 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 04 Mar 2015 02:29:11 -0800 (PST) From: "Raz Amir" To: "'Bruce Richardson'" References: <1424932400-66862-1-git-send-email-razamir22@gmail.com> <20150303133246.GB11084@bricha3-MOBL3> <053901d0565a$ac8c36e0$05a4a4a0$@gmail.com> <20150304101301.GA1468@bricha3-MOBL3> In-Reply-To: <20150304101301.GA1468@bricha3-MOBL3> Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 12:28:01 +0200 Message-ID: <055201d05665$e56d8530$b0488f90$@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Thread-Index: AQL76vl+o9soqPI/+Wx+6keMGfRa0gIfC0c5AlVbqY4CJGskXJqALxPw Content-Language: en-gb Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] pci: save list of detached devices, and re-probe during driver unload X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2015 10:29:12 -0000 Understood. I already sent the updated patch, so I will fix this and resend it soon. -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richardson@intel.com] Sent: 04 March 2015 12:13 To: Raz Amir Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] pci: save list of detached devices, and re-probe during driver unload On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 11:07:41AM +0200, Raz Amir wrote: > Thank you. > > See answers inline (mostly ack, but not only), and I will send the > updated patch soon. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Bruce Richardson [mailto:bruce.richardson@intel.com] > > > Sent: 03 March 2015 15:33 > > > To: Raz Amir > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] pci: save list of detached devices, > > and > re- > > > probe during driver unload > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 06:33:20AM +0000, Raz Amir wrote: > > > > Added code that saves the pointers to the detached devices, during > > > > driver loading, and during driver unloading, go over the list, and > > > > re-attach them by calling device_probe_and_attach on each device. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Raz Amir < > razamir22@gmail.com> > > > > > > Couple of minor comments below. Otherwise all looks good to me. > > > > > > Acked-by: Bruce Richardson < > bruce.richardson@intel.com> > > > > --- > > > > lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/nic_uio/nic_uio.c | 26 > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > > > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/nic_uio/nic_uio.c > > > > b/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/nic_uio/nic_uio.c > > > > index 5ae8560..7d702a5 100644 > > > > --- a/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/nic_uio/nic_uio.c > > > > +++ b/lib/librte_eal/bsdapp/nic_uio/nic_uio.c > > > > @@ -55,6 +55,9 @@ __FBSDID("$FreeBSD$"); > > > > > > > > #define MAX_BARS (PCIR_MAX_BAR_0 + 1) > > > > > > > > +#define MAX_DETACHED_DEVICES 128 > > > > +static device_t detached_devices[MAX_DETACHED_DEVICES] = {}; > > > +static > > > > +int last_detached = 0; > > > Maybe num_detached/nb_detached or even just "detached" instead of > > > "last_detached". > > Ack. > > > > > > > > > > > > > struct nic_uio_softc { > > > > device_t dev_t; > > > > @@ -291,14 +294,35 @@ nic_uio_load(void) > > > > if (dev != NULL) > > > > > > We are getting into some serious levels of indentation below, so > > maybe > flip > > > this condition around and put in a "continue" instead, so that we > > can > dedent > > > everything below that follows it. > > > > > Ack. > > > > > > for (i = 0; i < > > > NUM_DEVICES; > i++) > > > > if > (pci_get_vendor(dev) == devices[i].vend > > > && > > > > - > pci_get_device(dev) == > > > devices[i].dev) > > > > + > pci_get_device(dev) == > > > devices[i].dev) { > > > > + > if (last_detached+1 < > > > MAX_DETACHED_DEVICES) { > > > I don't think you need the +1 here. > > It is needed, otherwise the last object will be added at > MAX_DETACHED_DEVICES position while the last position is > MAX_DETACHED_DEVICES-1. Yes, the last position is MAX_DETACHED_DEVICES-1, but you do the addition of the element to the array using "detached_devices[last_detached++]", i.e. a post-increment, so when last_detached == (MAX_DETACHED_DEVICES-1), you still can fill in an entry. Next time around, when last_detached == MAX_DETACHED_DEVICES it's no longer safe to add, and the condition "last_detached < MAX_DETACHED_DEVICES) will now fail. No +1 or -1 necessary to prevent this. /Bruce