On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 7:52 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 11:36:42AM +0800, 李东升 wrote:
> > When virtio vdpa device removed, the abnormal damage of the device cannot be
> > perceived normally, which will cause problems similar to:
> >
> > 43bb40c5b926
>
>
> Should include the subject of the patch too.
>
> > Hence, add the ability to abort the command on surprise removal
> >
> > Signed-off-by: dongsheng li <lidongsheng@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> When removing gracefully,
> I am not sure we should break device unconditionally like this
> before giving drivers a chance to clean up.
> Should we just do it for surprise removal?
That requires a new method to query whether it's a surprise removal.
Thanks
>
> > ---
> > drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> > index 4a9ddb44b2a7..fd930409d190 100644
> > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_vdpa.c
> > @@ -374,6 +374,7 @@ static void virtio_vdpa_remove(struct vdpa_device *vdpa)
> > {
> > struct virtio_vdpa_device *vd_dev = vdpa_get_drvdata(vdpa);
> >
> > + virtio_break_device(vd_dev->vdev);
> > unregister_virtio_device(&vd_dev->vdev);
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 2.17.1
>
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
