From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH] bus/vdev: fix probe same device twice Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2018 21:36:22 +0100 Message-ID: <2180900.HKzicAuZ6Y@xps> References: <20181106003150.10560-1-qi.z.zhang@intel.com> <11443385.dze8hbQCXQ@xps> <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E70611532E0279@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "gaetan.rivet@6wind.com" , "Yigit, Ferruh" To: "Zhang, Qi Z" Return-path: Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 755281D7 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 21:36:26 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E70611532E0279@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 06/11/2018 16:46, Zhang, Qi Z: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > > > Hi, > > > > 06/11/2018 01:31, Qi Zhang: > > > When probe the same device at second time > > > > Sorry I stop on this first sentence. > > How and why do you probe a vdev twice? > > if we do rte_dev_hotplug_add or rte_dev_proble on a probed device. (yes, this is not usually what an application want, but it can happen by miss-operation, and this is covered by our test case, it make sense to me that hotplug API should be robust enough to handle that situation.) Yes I agree we must handle this situation. > we will failed at the second time as expected, > but will not able to detach the device any more, since during the second scan, original vdev->device.devargs is corrupted. The root cause is we remove a devargs which was referenced. Could we overwrite the first devargs instead of removing it?