Hi Stephen From: Stephen Hemminger > On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 05:52:20 +0000 > Matan Azrad <ma...@mellanox.com> wrote: > > > Hi Stephen > > > > From: Stephen Hemminger > > > The rte_eth_dev_owner_unset function is unusable because it always > > > returns -EINVAL. This is because the magic (unowned) value is > > > flagged as not valid. > > > > > > > It's OK to raise an error when you do unset for unowned device. > > It means that unset owner should be called for owned device. > > > > Original code was broken. The following would always fail. > > rte_eth_dev_owner_new(&owner.id); > sprintf(owner.name, "example"); > rte_eth_dev_owner_set(port_id, &owner); > rte_eth_dev_owner_unset(port_id, owner.id); > > That is because of: > rte_eth_dev_owner_unset(port_id, owner_id) > _rte_eth_dev_owner_set(port_id, owner_id, &new_owner) > << new_owner.id == RTE_ETH_DEV_NO_OWNER (0) > > > if (!rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(new_owner->id) && << > new_owner->id == RTE_ETH_DEV_NO_OWNER (which is flagged as invalid) > !rte_eth_is_valid_owner_id(old_owner_id)) > return -EINVAL; >
But both should be invalid the new owner and the old owner(&&) to raise an EINVAL error. In the aforementioned check above the old owner should be valid. > The failsafe driver never checks the return value, and therefore doesn't see > that it never clears ownership.
