All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
	David VomLehn <dvomlehn@cisco.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, greg@kroah.com,
	linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] initdev:kernel: Asynchronously-discovered device synchronization, v5
Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 16:21:15 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090503162115.2dff79bd@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0905021335150.26241-100000@netrider.rowland.org>

On Sat, 2 May 2009 13:55:45 -0400 (EDT)
Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:

> On Sat, 2 May 2009, James Bottomley wrote:
> 
> > OK, so in your scheme, I get why console devices: they need to be
> > present early before we start dumping console output otherwise it
> > can get lost.
> > 
> > However, I don't see the need for either network or block.
> > 
> > For network, the only early discovery use is net root (which can be
> > done fully asynchronously)
> 
> Are you referring to the "rootwait" kernel parameter?  Is there a 
> reason why this is a boot-time parameter instead of always being
> set? I mean, under what circumstances would you _not_ want to wait
> until the root device is present?

if you have an initrd ;-)
> 
> Perhaps with some enterprise systems, it is preferred to have the 
> system fail with an explicit error message rather than wait 
> indefinitely...

actually, in an enterprise system, you want to reboot.
The bootloader might boot a different kernel the next time
that is known to work.
(for example, the current kernel might have been booted with the "once"
grub option)
> 
> > What I'm getting at is that I don't see the benefit of this in the
> > light of Arjan's async boot system, which can also tell us when all
> > discovery is complete ... what added benefit am I missing here?
> 
> How does Arjan's async boot system tell use when all discovery is
> complete?  AFAICS, it only tells you when all its async tasks are
> finished.  But device discovery and registration sometimes use other
> asynchronous techniques which Arjan's code is unaware of.
> Examples: the USB khubd thread, the USB mass-storage scanning thread,
> and the SCSI async-scanning thread.

for normal device probing we already have infrastructure though...
wait_for_device_probe, driver_probe_done and friends...
(the scsi scanning thread is being converted to the async
infrastructure btw)

do we need to invent more ?

-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
	David VomLehn <dvomlehn@cisco.com>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	<linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>, <greg@kroah.com>,
	<linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] initdev:kernel: Asynchronously-discovered device synchronization, v5
Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 16:21:15 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090503162115.2dff79bd@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0905021335150.26241-100000@netrider.rowland.org>

On Sat, 2 May 2009 13:55:45 -0400 (EDT)
Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:

> On Sat, 2 May 2009, James Bottomley wrote:
> 
> > OK, so in your scheme, I get why console devices: they need to be
> > present early before we start dumping console output otherwise it
> > can get lost.
> > 
> > However, I don't see the need for either network or block.
> > 
> > For network, the only early discovery use is net root (which can be
> > done fully asynchronously)
> 
> Are you referring to the "rootwait" kernel parameter?  Is there a 
> reason why this is a boot-time parameter instead of always being
> set? I mean, under what circumstances would you _not_ want to wait
> until the root device is present?

if you have an initrd ;-)
> 
> Perhaps with some enterprise systems, it is preferred to have the 
> system fail with an explicit error message rather than wait 
> indefinitely...

actually, in an enterprise system, you want to reboot.
The bootloader might boot a different kernel the next time
that is known to work.
(for example, the current kernel might have been booted with the "once"
grub option)
> 
> > What I'm getting at is that I don't see the benefit of this in the
> > light of Arjan's async boot system, which can also tell us when all
> > discovery is complete ... what added benefit am I missing here?
> 
> How does Arjan's async boot system tell use when all discovery is
> complete?  AFAICS, it only tells you when all its async tasks are
> finished.  But device discovery and registration sometimes use other
> asynchronous techniques which Arjan's code is unaware of.
> Examples: the USB khubd thread, the USB mass-storage scanning thread,
> and the SCSI async-scanning thread.

for normal device probing we already have infrastructure though...
wait_for_device_probe, driver_probe_done and friends...
(the scsi scanning thread is being converted to the async
infrastructure btw)

do we need to invent more ?

-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org

  reply	other threads:[~2009-05-03 23:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-05-02  2:25 [PATCH 1/5] initdev:kernel: Asynchronously-discovered device synchronization, v5 David VomLehn
     [not found] ` <20090502022551.GA15600-CFZJ1or75eBPWxJt6d6B6bQa8qPdvLwY@public.gmane.org>
2009-05-02 13:31   ` Sergey Vlasov
2009-05-02 13:31     ` Sergey Vlasov
     [not found]     ` <20090502133153.GA8116-2JxNCdI+WHxBDLzU/O5InQ@public.gmane.org>
2009-05-02 14:16       ` Alan Stern
2009-05-02 14:16         ` Alan Stern
2009-05-02 14:16         ` Alan Stern
     [not found]         ` <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0905021010200.23879-100000-pYrvlCTfrz9XsRXLowluHWD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>
2009-05-05  0:33           ` David VomLehn
2009-05-05  0:33             ` David VomLehn
2009-05-05  0:31     ` [PATCH 1/5] initdev:kernel: Asynchronously-discovered devicesynchronization, v5 David VomLehn
2009-05-02 14:01   ` [PATCH 1/5] initdev:kernel: Asynchronously-discovered device synchronization, v5 James Bottomley
2009-05-02 14:01     ` James Bottomley
     [not found]     ` <1241272876.3639.27.camel-0iu6Cu4xQGLV0bN/WMK0Sm4KqUE0Tg80jeSHHoATDr/QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2009-05-02 17:55       ` Alan Stern
2009-05-02 17:55         ` Alan Stern
2009-05-02 17:55         ` Alan Stern
2009-05-03 23:21         ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2009-05-03 23:21           ` Arjan van de Ven
     [not found]           ` <20090503162115.2dff79bd-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org>
2009-05-04 14:30             ` Alan Stern
2009-05-04 14:30               ` Alan Stern
2009-05-04 14:30               ` Alan Stern
     [not found]               ` <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0905041026560.2961-100000-IYeN2dnnYyZXsRXLowluHWD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>
2009-05-04 14:45                 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-05-04 14:45                   ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-05-04 14:45                   ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-05-04 15:07                   ` Alan Stern
2009-05-04 15:07                     ` Alan Stern
2009-05-05 15:47                     ` Ming Lei
2009-05-05 15:47                       ` Ming Lei
2009-05-05 15:53                       ` Ming Lei
2009-05-05 15:53                         ` Ming Lei
     [not found]                         ` <d82e647a0905050853q4a1d5066ib71411cbef186c45-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2009-06-05 18:00                           ` David VomLehn
2009-06-05 18:00                             ` David VomLehn
2009-06-05 17:58                       ` David VomLehn
     [not found]         ` <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0905021335150.26241-100000-pYrvlCTfrz9XsRXLowluHWD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org>
2009-05-05  0:55           ` David VomLehn
2009-05-05  0:55             ` David VomLehn

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090503162115.2dff79bd@infradead.org \
    --to=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dvomlehn@cisco.com \
    --cc=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.