From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 316291A683F; Thu, 12 Mar 2026 12:59:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773320399; cv=none; b=MrzIuE2CYtS52rtEZSeltjVcu3pncJWs5WBPWgO/04thp+JD/TAusoLI8mXHYAgAImulYi5OzkVQHafusRBhvaYJW8qcKNE/Rih8uFR+6DFntTmCE3zltXD8h9acCWDBf4+td2+kwKd2kYV/e1ukzLjZ6peWZkBUld46FowIR4s= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773320399; c=relaxed/simple; bh=jnqnQKwftHtCIfpSHfz7acIeHazHEgJ0xJKgKEXMU7U=; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:Subject:Cc:To:From: References:In-Reply-To; b=QULkHKOnHUKilFm1XFpWllvlr5nAez4DnUeCIn9dD+gFS1w2ro6X8rqyPZSacKp8sAtgBUBp5f2wFARrqQjcoP97wSF7hTzSiR1HFOJcjW5xeHon7MP/JwRxVDErgydEZd9LbDo3WBYWWWQQJdEdF436CQTHGUNagBovub3y214= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=XQMzh00l; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="XQMzh00l" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8B268C2BCAF; Thu, 12 Mar 2026 12:59:54 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1773320398; bh=jnqnQKwftHtCIfpSHfz7acIeHazHEgJ0xJKgKEXMU7U=; h=Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=XQMzh00lPdskzeLywViKrxB7WK8P+wSnNIq+7/aXGXxRnb3hDcyJ4SVkWXEP/ZX85 Vi18/OQ/R/4oU6m3kinwsrb57nLtCm6R2dQPZs+aLFdRgdCGbaivG612r1xLQxG4Z7 Yz83Pu9m/TgSzzvVdREhz8y/9a0jb69riAot+RrSud63yjwnXULTF1nF3HDvSCqRSp 7UlxhMe3zOOev9XKvfGeMazvaQtaK9bL6dPeUMpaVzdJn5q1Etr0xUIs7vfG7oqM7l Wv56pSWmJFCrJrZg0quoSc908cMAy89sxAPQSe/8kCfIBs69iHoijTQOGSa9e4XX+0 6t7swwrOHVLew== Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: driver-core@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2026 13:59:52 +0100 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] PCI: dw-rockchip: Enable async probe by default Cc: "Manivannan Sadhasivam" , "Manivannan Sadhasivam" , "Lorenzo Pieralisi" , =?utf-8?q?Krzysztof_Wilczy=C5=84ski?= , "Rob Herring" , "Bjorn Helgaas" , "Heiko Stuebner" , "Niklas Cassel" , "Shawn Lin" , "Hans Zhang" <18255117159@163.com>, "Nicolas Frattaroli" , "Wilfred Mallawa" , , , , , "Anand Moon" , "Grimmauld" , "Greg Kroah-Hartman" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , , "Lukas Wunner" To: "Robin Murphy" From: "Danilo Krummrich" References: <20260226101032.1042-1-linux.amoon@gmail.com> <177260693908.10259.13055467642416391434.b4-ty@kernel.org> <87bc37ee-234c-4568-b72e-955c130a6838@arm.com> <5d88fb5b-e771-4ea6-8d2c-c5cfd21e5860@arm.com> <55c28218-1638-4b90-a9cd-a177fb5abcb6@arm.com> In-Reply-To: <55c28218-1638-4b90-a9cd-a177fb5abcb6@arm.com> On Thu Mar 12, 2026 at 1:48 PM CET, Robin Murphy wrote: > On 2026-03-11 9:09 pm, Danilo Krummrich wrote: >> From a driver-core perspective I think we're rather limited on what we = can do; >> we are already in async context at this point and can't magically go bac= k to >> initcall context. >>=20 >> So, the only thing I can think of is to kick off work on a workqueue, wh= ich in >> the end would be the same as the deferred probe handling. > > Hmm, in fact, isn't the deferred probe mechanism itself actually quite > appropriate? Yes, I've also mentioned this in [1], including the fact that it technicall= y even complies with the guarantees given by PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS. I.e. th= e documentation says: Use this to annotate drivers that need their probe routines to run synchronously with driver and device registration (with the exception of -EPROBE_DEFER handling - re-probing always ends up being done asynchronously). However, I'm still not sure how I feel about this, since I consider this to= be more like a workaround that just moves things to a "more approprite" async context. On the other hand, eventually we want everything to work with PROBE_PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS, so maybe it's also good enough for the time bein= g. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/driver-core/DGZJBMG2Y738.2MU5LXVGEDD47@kernel.o= rg/