From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <thomas@monjalon.net>
Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.29]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 817214CAB
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  8 Nov 2018 13:53:22 +0100 (CET)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41])
 by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 195E321BE2;
 Thu,  8 Nov 2018 07:53:22 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162])
 by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 08 Nov 2018 07:53:22 -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=5RZacwgsut2fC/Vxu23fEmHzSFNNUgMJfJxraSbXBng=; b=eaPOivLfA01q
 2cZC1NBayJG/0XfkE5D/OIt2fDMyA+5avxDy07heUWaOdGEBaezuHSLj9g3yY29Y
 5rj/84QC2KbzrIvm9EBXfo/txQlkweI2iBuZA4YOx6kot9ZznwDyLIdUjmPhghZz
 hTmjYNhpGzU9JYtcBjDDCz/vQBKUWBk=
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=5RZacwgsut2fC/Vxu23fEmHzSFNNUgMJfJxraSbXB
 ng=; b=AJLHmAzY6MHm4RQVA1YBA/2i4Ib9iMv+zemb26xvVe5nxrpu/srXCg+03
 /SSQwYn6Tk49Rf1efwh88Z3nMvEQ1DJQF6FObDha7Tvh8QS0hpS3xEeQk9PNlIRy
 ghiAaoJwqqO2cWfqe6Sj7E8G4M0kFq6WgtUadt49w8WqxTO5TqWVyEmtgMNdla7X
 oM3x6QRL58gbcbTKw1Geo1JrmcahIY3egKRVMof+1zihFttgUEtkk5IPUdoG2ES+
 kyEGRW4clc6Qz3gRMhdsQntHVWq2ZtqHKvqO5T6bNEOuNyoC6tNCJMuqCV0zw5oI
 R3tBwe4DyOX42eExuIWXCtrTpPEzQ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:wTHkW6iiwf5_NP7WBkaMIVI1ttI7eSJWTmFiJePtM2LoUI9DvwataQ>
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:wTHkW-WSSvLA2n3aMloKr76IE8DeWGRcSg6iW2FO4KpHSKnPqsZ1nw>
 <xmx:wTHkW02Cx8bJj7y26snRnJpo6g_Hgwd7yKV0qkE6_bfjWKmDrmVUhQ>
 <xmx:wTHkWxVVRMSqe3ZyD6OmmtZPuM19aG5DrqF_107tOQZrrIXKQ_BTVQ>
 <xmx:wTHkW882JLmsi5g0wI8n2Nsa93PB8bxqUXajQ7wW_gftSy5DarwIVQ>
 <xmx:wTHkW2xWLpNtZH9ELvbRkZeegXK0fncuGYvKZN42JkyXKXrxLGBu3A>
 <xmx:wjHkWzCyJAv-K4ngAXKVZb8c8M6_cYzHxOQAuqVvN6H2IvqiIvbTpQ>
Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184])
 by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id BD3B8E467A;
 Thu,  8 Nov 2018 07:53:20 -0500 (EST)
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: "Stojaczyk, Dariusz" <dariusz.stojaczyk@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
 "gaetan.rivet@6wind.com" <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>, "Zhang,
 Qi Z" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>, "Guo, Jia" <jia.guo@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2018 13:53:19 +0100
Message-ID: <3095983.aBgvmuOXeg@xps>
In-Reply-To: <FBE7E039FA50BF47A673AD0BD3CD56A84622BAB1@HASMSX105.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <20181107232105.19187-1-thomas@monjalon.net>
 <7262839.kmssWOtaOX@xps>
 <FBE7E039FA50BF47A673AD0BD3CD56A84622BAB1@HASMSX105.ger.corp.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] devargs: do not replace already inserted
	devargs
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2018 12:53:22 -0000

08/11/2018 13:35, Stojaczyk, Dariusz:
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net]
> > 08/11/2018 12:25, Stojaczyk, Dariusz:
> > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net]
> > > >
> > > > The devargs of a device can be replaced by a newly allocated one
> > > > when trying to probe again the same device (multi-process or
> > > > multi-ports scenarios). This is breaking some pointer references.
> > > >
> > > > It can be avoided by copying the new content, freeing the new devargs,
> > > > and returning the already inserted pointer.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > >
> > > Tested-by: Darek Stojaczyk <dariusz.stojaczyk@intel.com>
> > 
> > Is it fixing any use case?
> 
> Of course it is. I was previously seeing a regression with the following scenario:
> 1. hotplug device in the primary process
> 2. start a secodary process
> 3. hotplug device in secondary -> primary segfaults
> 
> And now it's working.

Good to know!
Thank you