Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CA+sq2CdDuimDCYK+9arO7-oRpNxdynX+rqYwpeBi9C_R+4pQNw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20180420162633.46077.49012.stgit@ahduyck-green-test.jf.intel.com>
 <20180420163109.46077.60334.stgit@ahduyck-green-test.jf.intel.com> <CA+sq2CdDuimDCYK+9arO7-oRpNxdynX+rqYwpeBi9C_R+4pQNw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:12:45 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKgT0UcTn=fxhrTvAaJNbGFiKPyZ-MaK0T6+AJewFs6YzDvT0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [pci PATCH v8 4/4] pci-pf-stub: Add PF driver stub for PFs that
 function only to enable VFs
To:     Sunil Kovvuri <sunil.kovvuri@gmail.com>
Cc:     Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        linux-pci <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
        virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux Netdev List <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Daly, Dan" <dan.daly@intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org,
        Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>, netanel@amazon.com,
        Don Dutile <ddutile@redhat.com>,
        Maximilian Heyne <mheyne@amazon.de>,
        "Wang, Liang-min" <liang-min.wang@intel.com>,
        "Rustad, Mark D" <mark.d.rustad@intel.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, dwmw@amazon.co.uk
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 3:52 AM, Sunil Kovvuri <sunil.kovvuri@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> +static struct pci_driver pf_stub_driver = {
>> +       .name                   = "pci-pf-stub",
>> +       .id_table               = pci_pf_stub_white_list,
>> +       .probe                  = pci_pf_stub_probe,
>> +       .sriov_configure        = pci_sriov_configure_simple,
>> +};
>> +
>
> Is there any specific reason for not disabling SRIOV upon driver unload/remove ?
>
> i.e if a user sets numVFs to a non-zero value and unloads this driver
> then we have a
> situation where there is no PF driver in kernel but VFs still exist.
>
> Thanks,
> Sunil.

I think it was probably just an oversight on my part. Feel free to
submit a patch to disable SR-IOV on remove and I will give it a quick
review/ack assuming the code itself is fine.

Thanks.

- Alex