From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4339EA0353; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 23:40:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C5131C0B; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 23:40:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5140C2AB; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 23:40:26 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C54F22382; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 17:40:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 19 Nov 2019 17:40:25 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=9tMiJMqF1tzM7e8AHLOUFZw3ewc5j9v7yWEy/D7DJBM=; b=L0KFkihWr/RO PNPwhpMv7TV252pfaZ8Mg7E7q+5BJWlKuIzpBPqsp93SnbUkh11lKeE65B7n39+d FTBNTd7l7cY2az5+eAh/IwDQHTIKCMwHppItpXW1e2sYc9aGNAnOBmxEZK1zSSrt p7o0sWOQD/M8vu5fj1q1xIyKfp8O2rY= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=9tMiJMqF1tzM7e8AHLOUFZw3ewc5j9v7yWEy/D7DJ BM=; b=v6I6yvkanup+ogF1XLqRTGfw6UxaAjWXWJadoRiTFIdmZpf9hUAN17M3J Mx2+BGPww2gcN1uzI4c6K+V/fu04HfB4DPHVOGpxCiMThDBOA+flhiGDEV3O5ABd hwS5Qh/GqWSyazN4ks+J9dRL2zFYoCkNbqeKvm1wEkjHCegNawyywg6tZrgugaR+ h1lKOgek8+7462idyAiqNpepeA+AcrM7wynbfyVnETdjw8uoHc1xr4LAXXxvQfMK Ea6KEote3jKi8viACt1OB+3osMJlBjirz0vct7V471Y0HS0k5xFbVlcaDRp6L1rT g82LSexii99vd4IpbL7Xa8UdyG6TA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedrudegkedgudeihecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc fkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpeht hhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 9F2CD306005B; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 17:40:23 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Matan Azrad Cc: stable@dpdk.org, dev@dpdk.org, Gaetan Rivet , Bernard Iremonger , mukawa@igel.co.jp, david.marchand@redhat.com Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 23:40:21 +0100 Message-ID: <1939572.QzvFjc1F9H@xps> In-Reply-To: <1573548459-6931-1-git-send-email-matan@mellanox.com> References: <1573548459-6931-1-git-send-email-matan@mellanox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH 1/2] bus/pci: fix driver detach clear X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 12/11/2019 09:47, Matan Azrad: > When a rte_device is unplugged, the driver should be detached from the > device. Yes > The PCI detach driver operation wrongly didn't clear the driver from the > device structure what remain the device in probe state from the EAL > point of view. Are you aware of an use case which is broken because of that? > --- a/drivers/bus/pci/pci_common.c > +++ b/drivers/bus/pci/pci_common.c > @@ -247,6 +247,7 @@ static struct rte_devargs *pci_devargs_lookup(struct rte_pci_device *dev) The git context above is wrong, it should show the function rte_pci_detach_dev. > /* clear driver structure */ > dev->driver = NULL; > + dev->device.driver = NULL; It looks a good fix. Acked-by: Thomas Monjalon I am wondering if there could be a risk for any test application if applied in 19.11-rc3. I think we should try to get it and revert if a side effect is discovered.