From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc: "linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org" <linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Jonas Jensen <jonas.jensen@gmail.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@gmail.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com>,
"linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/7] arm64: Support restart through restart notifier call chain
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 16:07:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140714150733.GE1112@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53C3F0BA.5020201@roeck-us.net>
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 04:01:14PM +0100, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 07/14/2014 07:55 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 04:30:26PM +0100, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> >> index 43b7c34..b2da6d5 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> >> @@ -174,6 +174,8 @@ void machine_restart(char *cmd)
> >> /* Now call the architecture specific reboot code. */
> >> if (arm_pm_restart)
> >> arm_pm_restart(reboot_mode, cmd);
> >> + else
> >> + kernel_restart_notify(cmd);
> >
> > There are couple of drivers specific to arm64, once they are converted
> > we can get rid of arm_pm_restart entirely here.
>
> I thought you wanted to keep exporting arm_pm_restart.
No, I just thought you don't want the restart mechanism implemented in
modules but the notifier registration still allows that, so I didn't
fully get the reasoning. But I agree on the race aspect.
> That logically implies
> that you want to have the ability to write new drivers which use it, which
> in turn implies that converting existing drivers would not make much sense.
If the new handler registration mechanism gives the functionality, I
don't see why we should keep arm_pm_restart around (for arm64 it's
easier since there aren't many drivers setting it).
--
Catalin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 2/7] arm64: Support restart through restart notifier call chain
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 16:07:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140714150733.GE1112@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53C3F0BA.5020201@roeck-us.net>
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 04:01:14PM +0100, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 07/14/2014 07:55 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 04:30:26PM +0100, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> >> index 43b7c34..b2da6d5 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> >> @@ -174,6 +174,8 @@ void machine_restart(char *cmd)
> >> /* Now call the architecture specific reboot code. */
> >> if (arm_pm_restart)
> >> arm_pm_restart(reboot_mode, cmd);
> >> + else
> >> + kernel_restart_notify(cmd);
> >
> > There are couple of drivers specific to arm64, once they are converted
> > we can get rid of arm_pm_restart entirely here.
>
> I thought you wanted to keep exporting arm_pm_restart.
No, I just thought you don't want the restart mechanism implemented in
modules but the notifier registration still allows that, so I didn't
fully get the reasoning. But I agree on the race aspect.
> That logically implies
> that you want to have the ability to write new drivers which use it, which
> in turn implies that converting existing drivers would not make much sense.
If the new handler registration mechanism gives the functionality, I
don't see why we should keep arm_pm_restart around (for arm64 it's
easier since there aren't many drivers setting it).
--
Catalin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-14 15:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-13 15:30 [PATCH v4 0/7] kernel: Add support for restart notifier call chain Guenter Roeck
2014-07-13 15:30 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-13 15:30 ` [PATCH v4 1/7] " Guenter Roeck
2014-07-13 15:30 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-14 14:53 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-14 14:53 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-14 14:58 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-14 14:58 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-15 16:12 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-15 16:12 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-13 15:30 ` [PATCH v4 2/7] arm64: Support restart through " Guenter Roeck
2014-07-13 15:30 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-14 14:55 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-14 14:55 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-14 15:01 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-14 15:01 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-14 15:07 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2014-07-14 15:07 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-13 15:30 ` [PATCH v4 3/7] arm: " Guenter Roeck
2014-07-13 15:30 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-13 15:30 ` [PATCH v4 4/7] power/restart: Call machine_restart instead of arm_pm_restart Guenter Roeck
2014-07-13 15:30 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-13 15:30 ` [PATCH v4 5/7] watchdog: moxart: Register restart handler with restart notifier Guenter Roeck
2014-07-13 15:30 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-14 14:19 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-14 14:19 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-14 14:41 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-14 14:41 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-14 15:11 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-14 15:11 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-13 15:30 ` [PATCH v4 6/7] watchdog: alim7101: " Guenter Roeck
2014-07-13 15:30 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-13 15:30 ` [PATCH v4 7/7] arm/arm64: Unexport restart handlers Guenter Roeck
2014-07-13 15:30 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-14 14:22 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-14 14:22 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-14 14:39 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-14 14:39 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-14 15:09 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-14 15:09 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-07-14 16:26 ` Guenter Roeck
2014-07-14 16:26 ` Guenter Roeck
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=20140714150733.GE1112@arm.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=Will.Deacon@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=dbaryshkov@gmail.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=heiko@sntech.de \
--cc=jonas.jensen@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=t.figa@samsung.com \
--cc=wim@iguana.be \
/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.