From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH] eal: bus scan and probe never fail Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2017 01:21:41 +0200 Message-ID: <2075457.Vvey9mxHue@xps> References: <20170812102220.27773-1-shreyansh.jain@nxp.com> <422ce0c6-7868-b601-2fe9-e361497d7b14@nxp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Jan Blunck , Hemant Agrawal To: Shreyansh Jain Return-path: Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C3CF1B19E for ; Fri, 6 Oct 2017 01:21:43 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 19/09/2017 20:51, Jan Blunck: > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 1:36 PM, Hemant Agrawal wrote: > > Tested-by: Hemant Agrawal > > > > > > On 8/12/2017 3:52 PM, Shreyansh Jain wrote: > >> > >> Bus scan is responsible for finding devices over *all* buses. > >> Some of these buses might not be able to scan but that should > >> not prevent other buses to be scanned. > >> > > If scanning the bus fails this is signaling an error. In that case we > might even want to unregister the bus. A scan error seems important enough to be reported to the caller. OK to continue scanning other buses, but an error code should be returned. > >> Same is the case for probing. It is possible that some devices which > >> were scanned didn't have a specific driver. That should not prevent > >> other buses from being probed. > > Absolutely correct. Yes When we will have a probe notification, we will be able to notify the upper layer that a device probing has failed.