From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 943231B5A3 for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2018 15:59:58 +0100 (CET) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Nov 2018 06:59:57 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,270,1539673200"; d="scan'208";a="98492122" Received: from violet.igk.intel.com ([10.102.54.137]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Nov 2018 06:59:56 -0800 From: Darek Stojaczyk To: dev@dpdk.org Cc: thomas@monjalon.net, Darek Stojaczyk , qi.z.zhang@intel.com Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2018 15:58:24 +0100 Message-Id: <20181123145824.95786-1-dariusz.stojaczyk@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.17.1 Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] dev: don't fail the hotplug request if device is attached in secondary 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2018 14:59:59 -0000 Consider the following scenario: 1) primary process (A) starts, probes the bus 2) a secondary process (B) starts, probes the bus 3) yet another secondary process (C) starts 4) (C) registers the pci driver and hotplugs the device * an IPC attach req is sent to the primary (A) * (A) ignores the -EEXIST from process-local probe * (A) propagates the request to all secondary processes * (B) responds with -EEXIST * (A) replies to the original request with the -EEXIST return code * the -EEXIST is returned back to the user, although the device was successfully attached both locally and in all other processes This patch makes the primary process reply with rc=0 even if there was another secondary process with the device already attached. The primary process already didn't reply with -EEXIST when the device was attached locally, so now this behavior is even more consistent. Looking by the code, this seems to be the originally intended behavior. Fixes: ac9e4a17370f ("eal: support attach/detach shared device from secondary") Cc: qi.z.zhang@intel.com Signed-off-by: Darek Stojaczyk --- lib/librte_eal/common/hotplug_mp.c | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/hotplug_mp.c b/lib/librte_eal/common/hotplug_mp.c index 7c9fcc46c..c0115d5f6 100644 --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/hotplug_mp.c +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/hotplug_mp.c @@ -391,13 +391,13 @@ int eal_dev_hotplug_request_to_secondary(struct eal_dev_mp_req *req) struct eal_dev_mp_req *resp = (struct eal_dev_mp_req *)mp_reply.msgs[i].param; if (resp->result != 0) { - req->result = resp->result; if (req->t == EAL_DEV_REQ_TYPE_ATTACH && - req->result != -EEXIST) - break; + resp->result == -EEXIST) + continue; if (req->t == EAL_DEV_REQ_TYPE_DETACH && - req->result != -ENOENT) - break; + resp->result == -ENOENT) + continue; + req->result = resp->result; } } -- 2.17.1