On Tue, 10 May 2016 14:58:26 +0200
Jan Viktorin <viktorin at rehivetech.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 May 2016 11:53:21 +0000
> "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov at intel.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Jan,
> >
> >
> > > /*
> > > - * at this point, we know at least one port on this device is bound to
> > > VFIO,
> > > - * so we can proceed to try and set this particular port up
> > > - */
> > > -
> > > - /* check if the group is viable */
> > > - ret = ioctl(vfio_group_fd, VFIO_GROUP_GET_STATUS,
> > > &group_status);
> > > - if (ret) {
> > > - RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, " %s cannot get group status, "
> > > - "error %i (%s)\n", pci_addr, errno,
> > > strerror(errno));
> > > - close(vfio_group_fd);
> > > - clear_current_group();
> > > - return -1;
> > > - } else if (!(group_status.flags & VFIO_GROUP_FLAGS_VIABLE)) {
> > > - RTE_LOG(ERR, EAL, " %s VFIO group is not viable!\n",
> > > pci_addr);
> > > - close(vfio_group_fd);
> > > - clear_current_group();
> > > - return -1;
> > > - }
> > > -
> >
> > I think you've lost this bit when moving things around. I can't find any
> > viability checks in eal_vfio.c
>
> Thanks for this catch, I'll check. I've rebased the patch set once
> because there were some changes to the original VFIO code. Hope for no
> more such rebasing.
OK. Confirmed. Fixed for v2.
Jan
>
> Regards
> Jan
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Anatoly
>
>
>
--
Jan Viktorin E-mail: Viktorin at RehiveTech.com
System Architect Web: www.RehiveTech.com
RehiveTech
Brno, Czech Republic
