23/09/2020 18:44, Ferruh Yigit: > On 9/13/2020 11:07 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > The flag RTE_ETH_DEV_CLOSE_REMOVE is set so all port resources > > can be freed by rte_eth_dev_close(). > > > > Freeing of private port resources is moved > > from the ".remove(device)" to the ".dev_close(port)" operation. > > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net> > > --- > > drivers/net/pcap/rte_eth_pcap.c | 29 ++++++++++++++--------------- > > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/pcap/rte_eth_pcap.c > > b/drivers/net/pcap/rte_eth_pcap.c > > index 76e704a65a..a946fa9a1a 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/pcap/rte_eth_pcap.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/pcap/rte_eth_pcap.c > > @@ -734,6 +734,12 @@ eth_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev) > > unsigned int i; > > struct pmd_internals *internals = dev->data->dev_private; > > > > + if (internals == NULL) > > + return 0; > > Not sure if this check needed, can 'internals' be null at this stage?
I think yes we need to protect against a double close. > But perhaps need to add 'RTE_PROC_PRIMARY' check. Yes but that's not the goal of this patch. > > + rte_free(dev->process_private); > > Can we move freeing 'process_private' to 'rte_eth_dev_release_port()' Yes we could.
