From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] net/netvsc: not finding VF should not
 cause failure
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2018 22:12:20 +0000
Message-ID: <27dbe5f4-9bb1-8d58-cc57-da6243a7b951@intel.com>
References: <20181214012621.15213-1-stephen@networkplumber.org>
 <20181214012621.15213-4-stephen@networkplumber.org>
 <b991a5e3-c57c-6fb4-1b56-6eeff6341746@intel.com>
 <DM5PR21MB0698C89DE76C533F41190931CCBC0@DM5PR21MB0698.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
 <df33bd44-3100-f406-4ece-79cdd382c561@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>,
 Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga18.intel.com (mga18.intel.com [134.134.136.126])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1836D1B920
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 17 Dec 2018 23:12:24 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <df33bd44-3100-f406-4ece-79cdd382c561@intel.com>
Content-Language: en-US
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On 12/17/2018 10:11 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 12/17/2018 7:59 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>> This can go to 18.11 stable
> 
> I will add fixes and stable tags while merging, please provide them with commit
> to ensure the backport of the patches to the stable trees.

Added:

    Fixes: dc7680e8597c ("net/netvsc: support integrated VF")
    Cc: stable@dpdk.org

> 
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> 
>> Sent: Monday, December 17, 2018 2:49 AM
>> To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>; dev@dpdk.org
>> Cc: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>; Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/3] net/netvsc: not finding VF should not cause failure
>>
>> On 12/14/2018 1:26 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>>> It is possible that the VF device exists but DPDK doesn't know
>>> about it. This could happen if device was blacklisted or more
>>> likely the necessary device (Mellanox) was not part of the DPDK
>>> configuration.
>>>
>>> In either case, the right thing to do is just keep working
>>> but only with the slower para-virtual device.
>>
>> Same question for this one, is this something that should be backported?
>> Is it intentionally left out from backporting?
>>
>> Just a reminder, for backport, a patch needs a few markers,
>> - fix patch with fixes line
>> - Cc: stable@dpdk.org line
>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/net/netvsc/hn_ethdev.c | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/netvsc/hn_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/netvsc/hn_ethdev.c
>>> index de872212d3f3..1f7a7e66a51b 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/netvsc/hn_ethdev.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/netvsc/hn_ethdev.c
>>> @@ -788,7 +788,7 @@ eth_hn_dev_init(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev)
>>>  
>>>  		err = hn_vf_add(eth_dev, hv);
>>>  		if (err)
>>> -			goto failed;
>>> +			hv->vf_present = 0;
>>>  	}
>>>  
>>>  	return 0;
>>>
>>
>