Ferruh,
On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 5:30 PM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> wrote:
> On 6/1/2019 5:13 PM, Ye Xiaolong wrote:
> > On 05/31, William Tu wrote:
> >> When users call rte_eth_dev_close() and rte_dev_remove(), the af_xdp
> >> pmd return -1 (EPERM) due to eth_dev == NULL.
> >>
> >> Since the af_xdp pmd driver advertises RTE_ETH_DEV_CLOSE_REMOVE, all
> >> the resources are freed on rte_eth_dev_close(). rte_dev_remove() tries
> >> to detach device and subsequently calls rte_pmd_af_xdp_remove() that
> tries
> >> to free already freed resources and fails. Fix it by return success.
> >>
> >> Fixes: f1debd77efaf6 ("net/af_xdp: introduce AF_XDP PMD")
> >> Reported-at: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1106528/
> >> Signed-off-by: William Tu <u9012...@gmail.com>
> >> Suggested-by: Ilya Maximets <i.maxim...@samsung.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c | 2 +-
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> >> index 35c72272c919..3dcc3628c5d0 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> >> @@ -944,7 +944,7 @@ rte_pmd_af_xdp_remove(struct rte_vdev_device *dev)
> >> /* find the ethdev entry */
> >> eth_dev = rte_eth_dev_allocated(rte_vdev_device_name(dev));
> >> if (eth_dev == NULL)
> >> - return -1;
> >> + return 0;
> >>
> >> eth_dev_close(eth_dev);
> >> rte_eth_dev_release_port(eth_dev);
> >
> > Looks good to me. Thanks for the fix.
> >
> > Acked-by: Xiaolong Ye <xiaolong...@intel.com>
>
> Applied to dpdk-next-net/master, thanks.
>
Don't we have similar issues with the current drivers flagged
RTE_ETH_DEV_CLOSE_REMOVE ?
And we are missing a check on this flag in rte_eth_dev_pci_generic_remove().
--
David Marchand
