linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com (Tomeu Vizoso)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 10/21] regulator: core: Probe regulators on demand
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 17:08:38 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAAObsKA_59z0qYmUqux7dMO38vOrLBUM_eWZ-QeJxEEmunq2ZQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150526093601.GH21577@sirena.org.uk>

On 26 May 2015 at 11:36, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 08:17:23AM +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>> On 25 May 2015 at 19:32, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
>
>> > The obvious questions here based on the name are why we're doing
>> > something specific to platform devices and why this isn't something
>> > we're abstracting in the driver core (or at least generic firmware code)
>> > - we're going to have the same thing with ACPI.
>
>> I don't know how useful this is going to be in systems with ACPI. My
>> experience is limited to 32bit ARM, where the kernel has to manage
>> every regulator, clock, gpio, etc so the dependency tree is so big. Is
>> deferred probing a problem with ACPI as well?
>
> Yes, x86 based embedded systems use ACPI (and we really ought to be
> trying to help systems using board files too for that matter).

Yes, I see how registering devices on-demand could be implemented for
all those, but what I don't see is how they would benefit from it.

I can see an hypothetical maintenance benefit in sharing as much code
as possible between these different scenarios, but in this case,
because this feature is so closely tied to machine description I think
complexity would be actually bigger.

The problem I'm trying to address only manifests on systems with
dozens of devices that are currently registered in an arbitrary order
(as they are in the DT).

On machines that have ACPI, most of those devices aren't exposed to
the kernel and few or no deferred probes happen (though I have only
tested on qemu and Minnowboard MAX, both with no deferred probes).

On machines with board files, devices are registered in a
predetermined order, presumably without any deferred probes.

My understanding is that the problem I'm addressing is specific of
machines in which the kernel is in charge of pretty much everything
and that the information about what devices are present is given in an
arbitrary order.

Deferred probe gives us reliably a working system at the end for these
machines, but in the meantime some devices will have been deferred
several times and when they get to probe the user will have noticed
the delay.

Regards,

Tomeu

  reply	other threads:[~2015-05-26 15:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-25 14:53 [PATCH 00/21] On-demand device registration Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 01/21] regulator: core: Reduce critical area in _regulator_get Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 17:18   ` Mark Brown
2015-05-25 17:45   ` Mark Brown
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 02/21] ARM: tegra: Add gpio-ranges property Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-26 19:41   ` Stephen Warren
2015-05-27 14:18     ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-27 14:49       ` Stephen Warren
2015-05-28  8:26         ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-28 15:50           ` Stephen Warren
2015-06-16  7:53             ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-06-02 11:28     ` Linus Walleij
2015-06-02 15:40       ` Stephen Warren
2015-06-16  8:42         ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-06-16 20:32           ` Stephen Warren
2015-06-17 10:04             ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 03/21] ARM: tegra: Register drivers before devices Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 04/21] ARM: EXYNOS: " Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-26  0:41   ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 05/21] ARM i.MX6q: " Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 06/21] of/platform: Add of_platform_device_ensure() Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-26 18:56   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-05-27  8:04     ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 07/21] of/platform: Ensure device registration on lookup Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 08/21] gpio: Probe GPIO drivers on demand Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 09/21] gpio: Probe pinctrl devices " Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 10/21] regulator: core: Probe regulators " Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 17:32   ` Mark Brown
2015-05-26  6:17     ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-26  9:36       ` Mark Brown
2015-05-26 15:08         ` Tomeu Vizoso [this message]
2015-05-26 16:54           ` Mark Brown
2015-05-26 17:53             ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-26 19:55               ` Mark Brown
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 11/21] drm: Probe panels " Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 12/21] drm/tegra: Probe dpaux devices " Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 13/21] i2c: core: Probe i2c master " Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 14/21] pwm: Probe PWM chip " Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 15/21] backlight: Probe backlight " Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-26  7:18   ` Lee Jones
2015-05-26  7:25     ` Sascha Hauer
2015-05-26  8:39       ` Lee Jones
2015-05-26 12:01         ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-26 13:34           ` Lee Jones
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 16/21] usb: phy: Probe phy " Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-26 14:44   ` Felipe Balbi
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 17/21] clk: Probe clk providers " Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-28  6:16   ` Michael Turquette
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 18/21] pinctrl: Probe pinctrl devices " Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 19/21] phy: core: Probe phy providers " Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 20/21] dma: of: Probe DMA controllers " Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-25 14:53 ` [PATCH 21/21] power-supply: Probe power supplies " Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-28  4:33 ` [PATCH 00/21] On-demand device registration Rob Herring
2015-06-03 19:57   ` Grygorii.Strashko@linaro.org
2015-06-04  8:39     ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-06-04 16:51       ` Grygorii.Strashko@linaro.org
2015-06-04 20:39     ` Alexander Holler
2015-06-08 12:26       ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2015-06-08 18:14         ` Alexander Holler
2015-06-08 18:18           ` Alexander Holler
2015-06-22 15:23   ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-06-23  0:01     ` Rob Herring
2015-06-02  8:48 ` Linus Walleij
2015-06-02 10:14   ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-06-10  7:30     ` Linus Walleij
2015-06-10 10:19       ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-06-11  8:15         ` Linus Walleij
2015-06-11  9:56           ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-06-03 21:12 ` Rob Clark
2015-06-04 21:03   ` Alexander Holler

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=CAAObsKA_59z0qYmUqux7dMO38vOrLBUM_eWZ-QeJxEEmunq2ZQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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).