From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wei Yang Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.14-stable] net/mlx4_core: Preserve pci_dev_data after __mlx4_remove_one() Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 09:44:19 +0800 Message-ID: <20140604014419.GA8817@richard> References: <1401607475-8367-1-git-send-email-weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20140601073853.GA8635@richard> <538AF2CB.20603@mellanox.com> <20140602135334.GA28523@richard> Reply-To: Wei Yang Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Wei Yang , Or Gerlitz , David Miller , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , Bjorn Helgaas , Amir Vadai , Jack Morgenstein To: Or Gerlitz Return-path: Received: from e23smtp04.au.ibm.com ([202.81.31.146]:36117 "EHLO e23smtp04.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752408AbaFDBo3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jun 2014 21:44:29 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e23smtp04.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 11:44:26 +1000 Received: from d23relay05.au.ibm.com (d23relay05.au.ibm.com [9.190.235.152]) by d23dlp02.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E93C2BB0054 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 11:44:22 +1000 (EST) Received: from d23av01.au.ibm.com (d23av01.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.96]) by d23relay05.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id s541MT3f57212942 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 11:22:30 +1000 Received: from d23av01.au.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d23av01.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id s541iKvc026370 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2014 11:44:21 +1000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 11:43:05AM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote: >On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Wei Yang > > >> Thanks for your notification, I saw your patch to fix this issue. >> Sorry for bringing a bug in the driver and thanks for your test :-) > >sure > >> Hmm... actually I don't understand how you trigger this crash? > >1. load the driver with num_vfs = (say) four and probe_vf (say) = two >2. reboot > Thanks, I would do some tests to see why this happens. >[...] > >> Last but not the least, based on the fix you have submitted, the porting here >> is correct. My suggestion is after your fix is merged, you could do the >> porting to those version too. > >As I wrote in the other thread to Bjorn, we're practically OOO for the >rest of this week, and anyway, I suggest we 1st see what ends up >happening with the fix to the regression introduced by your commit and >take it from there. Sure :-) -- Richard Yang Help you, Help me