Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758316Ab3ENT7g (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 May 2013 15:59:36 -0400 Received: from mail-ie0-f178.google.com ([209.85.223.178]:34574 "EHLO mail-ie0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755008Ab3ENT7e (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 May 2013 15:59:34 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5192946F.1050700@intel.com> References: <1368498506-25857-1-git-send-email-yinghai@kernel.org> <1368498506-25857-7-git-send-email-yinghai@kernel.org> <51925FB0.4080504@intel.com> <5192946F.1050700@intel.com> Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 12:59:33 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0UwR2KZ56jnl8zt8WdyN1Aus8cY Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] PCI: Make sure VF's driver get attached after PF's From: Yinghai Lu To: Alexander Duyck Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , Gu Zheng , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , NetDev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1574 Lines: 40 On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Alexander Duyck wrote: > On 05/14/2013 11:44 AM, Yinghai Lu wrote: >> On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Alexander Duyck >> wrote: >>> I'm sorry, but what is the point of this patch? With device assignment >>> it is always possible to have VFs loaded and the PF driver unloaded >>> since you cannot remove the VFs if they are assigned to a VM. >> unload PF driver will not call pci_disable_sriov? > > You cannot call pci_disable_sriov because you will panic all of the > guests that have devices assigned. ixgbe_remove did call pci_disable_sriov... for guest panic, that is another problem. just like you pci passthrough with real pci device and hotremove the card in host. ... > So how does your patch actually fix this problem? It seems like it is > just avoiding it. yes, until the first one is done. > > From what I can tell your problem is originating in pci_call_probe. I > believe it is calling work_on_cpu and that doesn't seem correct since > the work should be taking place on a CPU already local to the PF. You > might want to look there to see why you are trying to schedule work on a > CPU which should be perfectly fine for you to already be doing your work on. it always try to go with local cpu with same pxm. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/