From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Or Gerlitz Subject: Re: [Patch net-next] net/mlx4_core: match pci_device_id including dynids Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 19:51:22 +0300 Message-ID: References: <1396750050-7183-1-git-send-email-weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20140407.144340.688537373203786487.davem@davemloft.net> <53439BBE.4070708@mellanox.com> <20140408.122538.300463519945725052.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Or Gerlitz , Wei Yang , Yevgeny Petrilin , Amir Vadai , Bjorn Helgaas , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mail-qc0-f179.google.com ([209.85.216.179]:41091 "EHLO mail-qc0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757217AbaDHQvX (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Apr 2014 12:51:23 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20140408.122538.300463519945725052.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 7:25 PM, David Miller wrote: > > From: Or Gerlitz > Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2014 09:48:30 +0300 > > > On 07/04/2014 21:43, David Miller wrote: > >> From: Wei Yang > >> Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2014 10:07:30 +0800 > >> > >>> Fix issue introduced by commit: 97a5221 "net/mlx4_core: pass > >>> pci_device_id.driver_data to __mlx4_init_one during reset". > >>> > >>> pci_match_id() just match the static pci_device_id, which may return > >>> NULL if > >>> someone binds the driver to a device manually using > >>> /sys/bus/pci/drivers/.../new_id. > >>> > >>> This patch wrap up a helper function __mlx4_remove_one() which does > >>> the tear > >>> down function but preserve the drv_data. Functions like > >>> mlx4_pci_err_detected() and mlx4_restart_one() will call this one with > >>> out > >>> releasing drvdata. > >>> > >>> Tested on ConnectX-3. > >>> > >>> CC: Bjorn Helgaas > >>> CC: Amir Vadai > >>> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang > >> Please resubmit this when the net-next tree opens back up, thanks. > > > > Dave, this patch is for net, since it fixes an issue in the current > > code (actually it relates to a patch > > that was merged after 3.14-rc7, so it would eventually might go to > > -stable too). The author wasn't very > > familiar with the exact differences/nature of net vs. net-next, so it > > might created some confusion here, I'v > > sent him few private notes to explain how things go... > > Then please resubmit this patch with the proper subject line, th ank you. We've sent some feedback on the patch to the author along with crash net vs. net-next course, I really hope V1 he will post with the proper tag...