On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 11:16:30AM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
>> * Actually, we should remove the PCI bridges as well.
>>@@ -416,7 +450,7 @@ static void *eeh_rmv_device(void *data, void *userdata)
>> driver = eeh_pcid_get(dev);
>> if (driver) {
>> eeh_pcid_put(dev);
>>- if (driver->err_handler)
>>+ if (removed && driver->err_handler)
>> return NULL;
>> }
>>
>>@@ -425,11 +459,21 @@ static void *eeh_rmv_device(void *data, void *userdata)
>> pci_name(dev));
>> edev->bus = dev->bus;
>> edev->mode |= EEH_DEV_DISCONNECTED;
>>- (*removed)++;
>>-
>>- pci_lock_rescan_remove();
>>- pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device(dev);
>>- pci_unlock_rescan_remove();
>>+ if (removed)
>>+ (*removed)++;
>>+
>>+#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_IOV
>>+ if (edev->mode & EEH_DEV_VF) {
>>+ pci_iov_virtfn_remove(edev->physfn, pdn->vf_index, 0);
>>+ edev->pdev = NULL;
>>+ pdn->pe_number = IODA_INVALID_PE;
>
>Setting the PE number to invalid one seems not correct because the PE
>is still consumed by the VF's RID.
>
In commit 781a868f3136, we introduce the check of pdn->pe_number in
pnv_pci_dma_dev_setup(). Since VFs are create/released dynamically, we need to
delay the bind between PE and the device. Then to avoid rebind it, we check
the pdn->pe_number. The WARN_ON() is what you suggested.
So if don't clear the pe_number here, we break that rule.
--
Richard Yang
Help you, Help me
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
