From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: "Zhang, Qi Z" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
"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: Sat, 10 Jun 2023 19:52:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230610195249.5a20af69@hermes.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E706115334BEC4@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 13:46:01 +0000
"Zhang, Qi Z" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com> wrote:
> > -----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 )
This seems to be the outstanding question on this old patch.
Is this possible? If so then the original code is ok, and patch is not required.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-11 2:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20190302024253.15594-1-thomas@monjalon.net>
2019-03-02 2:42 ` [dpdk-stable] " Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-13 13:46 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2023-06-11 2:52 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2019-03-02 2:42 ` [dpdk-stable] [PATCH 3/3] eal: fix multi-process probe failure handling Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-14 7:15 ` Zhang, Qi Z
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=20230610195249.5a20af69@hermes.local \
--to=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=dariusz.stojaczyk@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=qi.z.zhang@intel.com \
--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).