Re: OF_DYNAMIC node lifecycle

[Tyrel Datwyler <turtle.in.the.kernel-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>]

On 07/15/2014 10:33 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
> I've got another question about powerpc reconfiguration. I was looking
> at the dlpar_configure_connector() function in dlpar.c. I see that the
> function has the ability to process multiple nodes with additional
> sibling and child nodes. It appears to link them into a detached tree
> structure, and the function returns a pointer to the first node.
> 
> All of the callers of that function then call dlpar_attach_node(),
> which calls of_attach_node(). However, of_attach_node() only handles a
> single node. It doesn't handle siblings or children. Is this a bug?
> Does the configure connector ever actually receive more than one node
> at once?

Yes, it is sometimes the case we will get a tree structure back of more
than one node. Under the proc interface implementation this just worked.
With the move to sysfs it appears we have a regression here. What makes
more sense here, for us to walk the tree calling of_attach_node, or to
move such tree walking logic into of_attach_node? From what I can tell
we are the only consumers of of_attach_node.

-Tyrel

> 
> g.
> 
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 8:41 AM, Nathan Fontenot <nfont-V7BBcbaFuwjMbYB6QlFGEg@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> On 06/27/2014 07:41 AM, Grant Likely wrote:
>>> On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 15:01:49 -0500, Nathan Fontenot <nfont-V7BBcbaFuwjMbYB6QlFGEg@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>>> On 06/25/2014 03:24 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 15:10:55 -0500, Nathan Fontenot <nfont-V7BBcbaFuwjMbYB6QlFGEg@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> heh! I have often thought about adding reference counting to device tree
>>>>>>>> properties.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You horrible, horrible man.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes. I are evil :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After looking again the work needed to add reference counts to properties
>>>>>> would be huge. The few properties I am concerned with are specific to powerpc
>>>>>> so perhaps just adding an arch specific lock around updating those
>>>>>> properties would work.
>>>>>
>>>>> Which code/properties? I'd like to have a look myself.
>>>>
>>>> /ibm,dynamic-reconfiguration-memory/ibm,dynamic-memory
>>>>
>>>> The property is updated in
>>>> arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-memory.c:pseries_update_drconf_memory()
>>>
>>> Specifically, what do you need for the locking? Are you wanting to hold
>>> off additional changes while that function is executing? Pantelis is
>>> adding a mutex for device tree writers. Holding that mutex would prevent
>>> any changes from happening in the tree without affecting readers. Would
>>> that be sufficient?
>>
>> That would work.
>>
>> -Nathan
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxppc-dev mailing list
> Linuxppc-dev-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
> 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html