On 10/17/2017 1:14 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > This reverts commit 6b9ed026a8704b9e5ee5da7997617ef7cc82e114. > This reverts commit 5f6ff30dc5075c49069d684bab229aef7ff0fdc3. > This reverts commit b58eedfc7dd57eef6d12e2c654a52c834f36084a. > > There were bug reports about terminated application may leave device in > undesired state: > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-November/049745.html > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-November/050932.html > > And a proposal to fix: > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-December/051844.html > > Later another proposal triggered the discussion: > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-May/066317.html > > Finally a fix patch pushed into v17.08: > Commit: b58eedfc7dd5 ("igb_uio: issue FLR during open and release of device > file") > > Later a regression report sent related to the pushed patch: > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-September/075236.html > > And a fix for regression integrated into v17.11-rc1: > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-October/079166.html > Commit: 5f6ff30dc507 ("igb_uio: fix interrupt enablement after FLR in VM") > Commit: 6b9ed026a870 ("igb_uio: fix build with kernel <= 3.17") > > Even after the fix qede PMD reported to be broken: > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-October/079359.html > > So this patch reverts original fix and related commits. The related > igb_uio code part turns back to v17.05 base. > > Cc: Jianfeng Tan <jianfeng....@intel.com> > Cc: Jingjing Wu <jingjing...@intel.com> > Cc: Shijith Thotton <shijith.thot...@caviumnetworks.com> > Cc: Gregory Etelson <greg...@weka.io> > Cc: Harish Patil <harish.pa...@cavium.com> > Cc: George Prekas <george.pre...@epfl.ch> > > Fixes: b58eedfc7dd5 ("igb_uio: issue FLR during open and release of device > file") > Cc: sta...@dpdk.org > > Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> > --- > It would be nice to solve this issue in LTS release, but being close to > the release and the error report without details makes it hard to work > more on this issue. > > Thanks everyone who spent effort for this, hopefully we can continue to > work on next release cycle. > > Jingjing, there is a i40e commit, was part of igb_uio fix patchset, is > it generic, or needs to be reverted with this patch? > Commit: 8cacf78469a7 ("net/i40e: fix VF initialization error")
This patch is no more valid and will be marked as rejected, since instead of revert, agreed on a solution [1]. [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-October/thread.html#79815 http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/30654/
