On Mon, 23 Mar 2026 at 17:59, Kevin Traynor <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 3/23/26 10:52 AM, David Marchand wrote: > > The close operation was never closing probed devices. > > > > Taking a step back, reevaluating the devargs makes no sense during the > > close step, as a probed device must have passed the allow/block list > > evaluation initially. > > > > Since the device contains a reference to the driver that probed it, > > simply call this driver remove op. > > > > Fixes: 274fd921ff7f ("bus/fslmc: support close operation") > > Cc: [email protected] > > > > Signed-off-by: David Marchand <[email protected]> > > --- > > drivers/bus/fslmc/fslmc_vfio.c | 21 ++++----------------- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/bus/fslmc/fslmc_vfio.c b/drivers/bus/fslmc/fslmc_vfio.c > > index 550d4e0e8d..7daa18d850 100644 > > --- a/drivers/bus/fslmc/fslmc_vfio.c > > +++ b/drivers/bus/fslmc/fslmc_vfio.c > > @@ -1393,7 +1393,7 @@ fslmc_close_iodevices(struct rte_dpaa2_device *dev, > > { > > struct rte_dpaa2_object *object = NULL; > > struct rte_dpaa2_driver *drv; > > - int ret, probe_all; > > + int ret; > > > > switch (dev->dev_type) { > > case DPAA2_IO: > > @@ -1411,22 +1411,9 @@ fslmc_close_iodevices(struct rte_dpaa2_device *dev, > > case DPAA2_ETH: > > case DPAA2_CRYPTO: > > case DPAA2_QDMA: > > - probe_all = rte_fslmc_bus.bus.conf.scan_mode != > > - RTE_BUS_SCAN_ALLOWLIST; > > - TAILQ_FOREACH(drv, &rte_fslmc_bus.driver_list, next) { > > - if (drv->drv_type != dev->dev_type) > > - continue; > > - if (rte_dev_is_probed(&dev->device)) > > - continue; > > - if (probe_all || > > - (dev->device.devargs && > > - dev->device.devargs->policy == > > - RTE_DEV_ALLOWED)) { > > - ret = drv->remove(dev); > > - if (ret) > > - DPAA2_BUS_ERR("Unable to remove"); > > - } > > - } > > + drv = dev->driver; > > + if (drv && drv->remove && drv->remove(dev)) > > Not new but dpaa2_qdma_remove doesn't return an error which seems like a > bug, but it has it's own log and it's just a log here anyway, so not > critical. > > > + DPAA2_BUS_ERR("Unable to remove");
Indeed, the dma/dpaa2 driver does not report errors. And there is probably more to fix in the fslmc bus, as I see that the bus .unplug() does not check the driver .remove() return value either. I did not dig deeper in this bus for now as I was focusing on the devargs evaluation. Could you open a bugzilla for tracking this issue? Thanks. -- David Marchand
