On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 12:58:59AM +0800, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:21:56PM +0800, Yu Zhao wrote: > > + my_mac_addr[5] = (unsigned char)i; > > + igb_set_vf_mac(netdev, i, my_mac_addr); > > + igb_set_vf_vmolr(adapter, i); > > + } > > + } else > > + printk(KERN_INFO "SR-IOV is disabled\n"); > > Is that really true? (oh, use dev_info as well.) What happens if you > had called this with "5" and then later with "0", you never destroyed > those existing virtual functions, yet the code does: > > > + adapter->vfs_allocated_count = nr_virtfn; > > Which makes the driver think they are not present. What happens when > the driver later goes to shut down? Are those resources freed up > properly?
For now we hard-code the tx/rx queues allocation so this doesn't matter. Eventually this will become dynamic allocation: when number of VFs changes the corresponding resources need to be freed. I'll put more comments here. Thanks, Yu _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
