From: "Zhang, Qi Z" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "Stojaczyk, Dariusz" <dariusz.stojaczyk@intel.com>,
"stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] eal: remove useless checks for already probed device
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2019 13:46:01 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E706115334BEC4@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190302024253.15594-2-thomas@monjalon.net>
Hi:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net]
> Sent: Saturday, March 2, 2019 10:43 AM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Stojaczyk, Dariusz <dariusz.stojaczyk@intel.com>; Zhang, Qi Z
> <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>; stable@dpdk.org
> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] eal: remove useless checks for already probed device
>
> The function eal_dev_hotplug_request_to_secondary() never returns -EEXIST
> result. The case of already probed device is filtered out.
>
> The test in __handle_secondary_request() was always true.
> The test in rte_dev_probe() was never true, and that's fine not returning -EEXIST
> if device is already attached in secondary processes.
I didn't get this.
eal_dev_hotplug_request_to_secondary() never return -EEXIST, but req->result could be -EEXIST.
This happens when secondary try to attach an already attached device
(__handle_primary_request --> local_dev_probe --> dev->bus->plug )
>
> Fixes: 494db286f37d ("eal: fix multi-process hotplug if attached in secondary")
> Cc: dariusz.stojaczyk@intel.com
> Cc: qi.z.zhang@intel.com
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> ---
> lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_dev.c | 9 +--------
> lib/librte_eal/common/hotplug_mp.c | 3 +--
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_dev.c
> b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_dev.c
> index fd7f5ca7d5..048c0b025f 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_dev.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/eal_common_dev.c
> @@ -247,18 +247,11 @@ rte_dev_probe(const char *devargs)
> goto rollback;
> }
>
> - /**
> - * if any secondary failed to attach, we need to consider if rollback
> - * is necessary.
> - */
> + /* if any secondary failed to attach, need to rollback. */
> if (req.result != 0) {
> RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL,
> "Failed to attach device on secondary process\n");
> ret = req.result;
> -
> - /* for -EEXIST, we don't need to rollback. */
> - if (ret == -EEXIST)
> - return ret;
> goto rollback;
> }
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/hotplug_mp.c
> b/lib/librte_eal/common/hotplug_mp.c
> index 4052a5c7fb..94bd1d896e 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/hotplug_mp.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/hotplug_mp.c
> @@ -110,8 +110,7 @@ __handle_secondary_request(void *param)
> if (tmp_req.result != 0) {
> ret = tmp_req.result;
> RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, "Failed to hotplug add device on
> secondary\n");
> - if (ret != -EEXIST)
> - goto rollback;
> + goto rollback;
> }
> } else if (req->t == EAL_DEV_REQ_TYPE_DETACH) {
> ret = rte_devargs_parse(&da, req->devargs);
> --
> 2.20.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-13 13:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-02 2:42 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/3] fix error path of multi-process probe Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-02 2:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] eal: remove useless checks for already probed device Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-13 13:46 ` Zhang, Qi Z [this message]
2023-06-11 2:52 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-03-02 2:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/3] eal: remove error logs " Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-02 2:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/3] eal: fix multi-process probe failure handling Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-14 7:15 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2019-03-14 7:15 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2023-06-14 19:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/3] fix error path of multi-process probe Stephen Hemminger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E706115334BEC4@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com \
--to=qi.z.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=dariusz.stojaczyk@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).