[PATCH v4 18/27] net/iavf: decouple hash uninit from parser uninit

[Burakov, Anatoly]

On 2/16/2026 6:23 PM, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2026 at 10:26:29AM +0000, Anatoly Burakov wrote:
>> Currently, parser deinitialization will trigger removal of current RSS
>> configuration. This should not be done as part of parser deinitialization,
>> but should rather be a separate step in dev close flow.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.burakov at intel.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/net/intel/iavf/iavf_ethdev.c |  4 ++++
>>   drivers/net/intel/iavf/iavf_hash.c   | 13 +++++++++----
>>   drivers/net/intel/iavf/iavf_hash.h   | 13 +++++++++++++
>>   3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>   create mode 100644 drivers/net/intel/iavf/iavf_hash.h
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/intel/iavf/iavf_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/intel/iavf/iavf_ethdev.c
>> index 802e095174..70eb7e7ec5 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/intel/iavf/iavf_ethdev.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/intel/iavf/iavf_ethdev.c
>> @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@
>>   #include "iavf_generic_flow.h"
>>   #include "rte_pmd_iavf.h"
>>   #include "iavf_ipsec_crypto.h"
>> +#include "iavf_hash.h"
>>   
>>   /* devargs */
>>   #define IAVF_PROTO_XTR_ARG         "proto_xtr"
>> @@ -2972,6 +2973,9 @@ iavf_dev_close(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
>>   	/* free iAVF security device context all related resources */
>>   	iavf_security_ctx_destroy(adapter);
>>   
>> +	/* remove RSS configuration */
>> +	iavf_hash_uninit(adapter);
>> +
>>   	iavf_flow_flush(dev, NULL);
>>   	iavf_flow_uninit(adapter);
>>   
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/intel/iavf/iavf_hash.c b/drivers/net/intel/iavf/iavf_hash.c
>> index a40fed7542..d864998402 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/intel/iavf/iavf_hash.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/intel/iavf/iavf_hash.c
>> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
>>   #include "iavf_log.h"
>>   #include "iavf.h"
>>   #include "iavf_generic_flow.h"
>> +#include "iavf_hash.h"
>>   
>>   #define IAVF_PHINT_NONE				0
>>   #define IAVF_PHINT_GTPU				BIT_ULL(0)
>> @@ -77,7 +78,7 @@ static int
>>   iavf_hash_destroy(struct iavf_adapter *ad, struct rte_flow *flow,
>>   		  struct rte_flow_error *error);
>>   static void
>> -iavf_hash_uninit(struct iavf_adapter *ad);
>> +iavf_hash_uninit_parser(struct iavf_adapter *ad);
>>   static void
>>   iavf_hash_free(struct rte_flow *flow);
>>   static int
>> @@ -680,7 +681,7 @@ static struct iavf_flow_engine iavf_hash_engine = {
>>   	.init = iavf_hash_init,
>>   	.create = iavf_hash_create,
>>   	.destroy = iavf_hash_destroy,
>> -	.uninit = iavf_hash_uninit,
>> +	.uninit = iavf_hash_uninit_parser,
>>   	.free = iavf_hash_free,
>>   	.type = IAVF_FLOW_ENGINE_HASH,
>>   };
>> @@ -1641,6 +1642,12 @@ iavf_hash_destroy(__rte_unused struct iavf_adapter *ad,
>>   }
>>   
>>   static void
>> +iavf_hash_uninit_parser(struct iavf_adapter *ad)
>> +{
>> +	iavf_unregister_parser(&iavf_hash_parser, ad);
>> +}
>> +
>> +void
>>   iavf_hash_uninit(struct iavf_adapter *ad)
>>   {
>>   	struct iavf_info *vf = IAVF_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_VF(ad);
>> @@ -1658,8 +1665,6 @@ iavf_hash_uninit(struct iavf_adapter *ad)
>>   	rss_conf = &ad->dev_data->dev_conf.rx_adv_conf.rss_conf;
>>   	if (iavf_rss_hash_set(ad, rss_conf->rss_hf, false))
>>   		PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "fail to delete default RSS");
>> -
>> -	iavf_unregister_parser(&iavf_hash_parser, ad);
>>   }
>>   
>>   static void
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/intel/iavf/iavf_hash.h b/drivers/net/intel/iavf/iavf_hash.h
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000000..2348f32673
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/drivers/net/intel/iavf/iavf_hash.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
>> + * Copyright(c) 2025 Intel Corporation
>> + */
>> +
>> +#ifndef _IAVF_HASH_H_
>> +#define _IAVF_HASH_H_
>> +
>> +#include "iavf.h"
>> +
>> +void
>> +iavf_hash_uninit(struct iavf_adapter *ad);
>> +
>> +#endif /* _IAVF_HASH_H_ */
>> -- 
> 
> While its primarily a matter of taste, do we really need to create a new
> header for this? For a single function prototype can it not just go in
> iavf.h directly itself?
> 
> Either way:
> Acked-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson at intel.com>
> 

This code is not touched further down the line so yes, I can move it to 
iavf.h no problem.

-- 
Thanks,
Anatoly