From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
To: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
edumazet@google.com,
Paul M Stillwell Jr <paul.m.stillwell.jr@intel.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, jiri@nvidia.com,
Gurucharan G <gurucharanx.g@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/1] ice: move devlink port creation/deletion
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 08:59:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y8+B0UctSryV4VPk@unreal> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230124005714.3996270-1-anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 04:57:14PM -0800, Tony Nguyen wrote:
> From: Paul M Stillwell Jr <paul.m.stillwell.jr@intel.com>
>
> Commit a286ba738714 ("ice: reorder PF/representor devlink
> port register/unregister flows") moved the code to create
> and destroy the devlink PF port. This was fine, but created
> a corner case issue in the case of ice_register_netdev()
> failing. In that case, the driver would end up calling
> ice_devlink_destroy_pf_port() twice.
>
> Additionally, it makes no sense to tie creation of the devlink
> PF port to the creation of the netdev so separate out the
> code to create/destroy the devlink PF port from the netdev
> code. This makes it a cleaner interface.
>
> Fixes: a286ba738714 ("ice: reorder PF/representor devlink port register/unregister flows")
> Signed-off-by: Paul M Stillwell Jr <paul.m.stillwell.jr@intel.com>
> Tested-by: Gurucharan G <gurucharanx.g@intel.com> (A Contingent worker at Intel)
> Signed-off-by: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>
> ---
> There will be a merge conflict when rebasing with next-next.
>
> Resolution:
> static void ice_remove(struct pci_dev *
> ice_remove_arfs(pf);
> ice_setup_mc_magic_wake(pf);
> ice_vsi_release_all(pf);
> - mutex_destroy(&(&pf->hw)->fdir_fltr_lock);
> + mutex_destroy(&hw->fdir_fltr_lock);
> + ice_devlink_destroy_pf_port(pf);
> ice_set_wake(pf);
> ice_free_irq_msix_misc(pf);
> ice_for_each_vsi(pf, i) {
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_lib.c | 3 ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c | 25 +++++++++++++++--------
> 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
If you seek cleaner interface, you will be better separate
ice_vsi_release_all() to many small building blocks, so unwind will be
symmetrical to probe.
Thanks,
Reviewed-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-24 7:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-24 0:57 [PATCH net 1/1] ice: move devlink port creation/deletion Tony Nguyen
2023-01-24 6:59 ` Leon Romanovsky [this message]
2023-01-25 3:00 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=Y8+B0UctSryV4VPk@unreal \
--to=leon@kernel.org \
--cc=anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=gurucharanx.g@intel.com \
--cc=jiri@nvidia.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=paul.m.stillwell.jr@intel.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.