From: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI / GED: use late init to allow other drivers init
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 19:33:11 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3f0f2853-d2e5-be32-2bde-47e72c51a0a6@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0jaGnoCjiU6VuHLyy9Kug8nHzxPxP8tuy3kphtfgmW38w@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Rafael,
On 4/24/2017 7:01 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 12:48 AM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> On 4/21/2017 6:43 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>> +late_initcall(ged_init);
>>> Does this fix the problem?
>>>
>>> What about if the module in question is loaded after running late_initcalls?
>>
>> This fixed the issue for me where I had dependencies for QUP I2C driver and GHES
>> drivers. Both of them are modules and get probed via normal module execution path.
>>
>> However, I'm open to improvements. Do you have a better suggestion? I can try
>> to add some _DEP stuff if it is present, but I remember Linux doesn't like _DEP
>> stuff too much.
>
> My point is that nothing guarantees a specific ordering or timing of
> module loading in general, so moving stuff to different initcall
> levels does not really help 100% of the time.
>
I was thinking about this today. I agree that this is not a complete solution.
I'm interested in drivers that are either built-in or present in the initramfs.
Drivers that participate in GED work are considered essential drivers. I expect
these essential drivers to be present in early boot phase.
I can certainly improve the commit message.
As long as the drivers are built-in or available in initramfs, I expect this to work.
I want to focus on this use case.
static char *initcall_level_names[] __initdata = {
"early",
"core",
"postcore",
"arch",
"subsys",
"fs",
"device",
"late",
};
static void __init do_initcall_level(int level)
{
...
for (fn = initcall_levels[level]; fn < initcall_levels[level+1]; fn++)
do_one_initcall(*fn);
}
Given these constraints, doesn't this guarantee the order of initialization for built-in and
initramfs modules?
Of course, this won't also play nice with another driver module that requires late_init.
Maybe, this is 1% of the case.
If the driver gets pulled in from the rootfs via modules.conf, then this will definitely
not work as you indicated.
My proposal is to explore the presence of _DEP to reach to %100. Here is an example
GED OBJECT
{
Name(_DEP, "Some other object")
}
I see that ACPI core checks the presence of _DEP value in acpi_device_dep_initialize()
and it won't load the GED driver until dependencies are met if I got it right.
acpi_walk_dep_device_list() gets called from external drivers that need to unblock
the dependent object. acpi_gpiochip_add() seems to take care of this for GPIO.
i2c_acpi_install_space_handler() seems to take care of this for I2C.
We can potentially add acpi_walk_dep_device_list() to GHES driver for completeness.
Then, all FW needs to do is set up a dependency from GED object to its required objects.
Please let me know if I'm missing something.
> Thanks,
> Rafael
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
Sinan
--
Sinan Kaya
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-24 23:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-21 22:28 [PATCH] ACPI / GED: use late init to allow other drivers init Sinan Kaya
2017-04-21 22:43 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-04-21 22:48 ` Sinan Kaya
2017-04-21 22:48 ` Sinan Kaya
2017-04-24 23:01 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-04-24 23:33 ` Sinan Kaya [this message]
2017-04-25 7:01 ` Lukas Wunner
2017-04-25 16:24 ` Sinan Kaya
2017-04-28 2:32 ` Sinan Kaya
2017-05-11 0:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-05-11 1:38 ` Sinan Kaya
2017-05-11 0:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-05-11 13:43 ` Sinan Kaya
2017-05-11 14:52 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-05-15 2:36 ` Sinan Kaya
2017-05-15 10:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-05-21 15:51 ` Sinan Kaya
2017-04-25 1:43 ` Sinan Kaya
2017-04-25 11:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-04-25 16:25 ` Sinan Kaya
2017-04-24 22:49 ` Baicar, Tyler
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=3f0f2853-d2e5-be32-2bde-47e72c51a0a6@codeaurora.org \
--to=okaya@codeaurora.org \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=timur@codeaurora.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).