2016-03-01 07:53, Xie, Huawei:

On 3/1/2016 3:18 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:

quoted

2016-02-26 09:53, Huawei Xie:

quoted

@@ -1037,8 +1039,11 @@ eth_virtio_dev_init(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev)
 
 	pci_dev = eth_dev->pci_dev;
 
-	if (vtpci_init(pci_dev, hw) < 0)
-		return -1;
+	ret = vtpci_init(pci_dev, hw);
+	if (ret) {
+		rte_free(eth_dev->data->mac_addrs);

The freeing seems not related to this patch.

I can send a separate patch, ok within this patchset?

Yes

quoted

[...]

quoted

 	PMD_INIT_LOG(INFO, "trying with legacy virtio pci.");
-	if (legacy_virtio_resource_init(dev, hw) < 0)
+	if (legacy_virtio_resource_init(dev, hw) < 0) {
+		if (dev->kdrv == RTE_KDRV_UNKNOWN) {
+			PMD_INIT_LOG(INFO,
+				"skip kernel managed virtio device.");
+			return 1;
+		}
 		return -1;
+	}

You cannot skip a device if it was whitelisted.
I think you should check RTE_DEVTYPE_WHITELISTED_PCI and throw an error
in this case.

I feel there is a subtle difference on the understanding of -w args. To
me, without it, probe all devices; with it, only probe whiltelisted API.
That is all.

I don't know if it is clearly documented indeed.

Do you mean that -w implies that devices whitelisted must be probed
successfully otherwise we throw an error? If i get it right, then what
about the devices whitelisted but without PMD driver?

Yes we should probably consider the whitelist as a "forced" init.
Later, we could introduce some device flags for probing/discovery:
PROBE_AUTO, PROBE_FORCE, PROBE_IGNORE. It would make white/black list
more precise.

I will fix, :).
if (dev->kdrv == RTE_KDRV_UNKNOWN && dev->devargs->type !=
RTE_DEVTYPE_WHITELISTED_PCI) {
        ....
        return 1;
}

You should also consider the blacklist case: if there is a blacklist,
the not blacklisted devices must be initialised or throw an error.