From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <jingjing.wu@intel.com>
Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C007A326C;
 Mon,  9 Jan 2017 10:44:13 +0100 (CET)
Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20])
 by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 Jan 2017 01:44:12 -0800
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,339,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="51631171"
Received: from fmsmsx105.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.203])
 by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 Jan 2017 01:44:12 -0800
Received: from fmsmsx102.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.200) by
 FMSMSX105.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS)
 id 14.3.248.2; Mon, 9 Jan 2017 01:44:12 -0800
Received: from shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.4.154) by
 FMSMSX102.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.200) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS)
 id 14.3.248.2; Mon, 9 Jan 2017 01:44:11 -0800
Received: from shsmsx103.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.4.20]) by
 shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.88]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002;
 Mon, 9 Jan 2017 17:44:09 +0800
From: "Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>
To: "Iremonger, Bernard" <bernard.iremonger@intel.com>, "Lu, Wenzhuo"
 <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
CC: "stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>
Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 26/27] net/i40e: fix segmentation fault
 in	close
Thread-Index: AQHSZY9SpmzpFDG60EazecjOQF49O6EqrT5ggAAqXICABRVDUA==
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 09:44:08 +0000
Message-ID: <9BB6961774997848B5B42BEC655768F810CC5369@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
References: <1480637533-37425-1-git-send-email-wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>
 <1483426488-117332-1-git-send-email-wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>
 <1483426488-117332-27-git-send-email-wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>
 <9BB6961774997848B5B42BEC655768F810CC3E79@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <8CEF83825BEC744B83065625E567D7C224D1B4CF@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <8CEF83825BEC744B83065625E567D7C224D1B4CF@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 26/27] net/i40e: fix segmentation fault
	in	close
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2017 09:44:14 -0000

>=20
> All of the VSI's are released in the call to i40e_vsi_release(pf->main_vs=
i) at line
> 1895.
> This function is recursive and release all the VSI's.
>=20
> There is still a VSI address in pf->vmdq[i].vsi  but calling i40e_vsi_rel=
ease(pf-
> >vmdq[i].vsi);
> Results in a segmentation fault.
>=20
Thanks for the clarification.

You are correct. What I prefer is to move the code to release vmdq vsis to
before the  i40e_vsi_release(pf->main_vsi);

What do you think?

Thanks
Jingjing