linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tyrel Datwyler <turtle.in.the.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
	Nathan Fontenot <nfont@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com>,
	Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: OF_DYNAMIC node lifecycle
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 11:30:22 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53C6C4BE.6010301@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACxGe6u5bVwYZjux9F2xzZSxZOSe37DGemCgcYtmiTP-xenQfg@mail.gmail.com>

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@austin.ibm.com> wrote:
>> On 06/27/2014 07:41 AM, Grant Likely wrote:
>>> On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 15:01:49 -0500, Nathan Fontenot <nfont@austin.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>> On 06/25/2014 03:24 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 15:10:55 -0500, Nathan Fontenot <nfont@austin.ibm.com> 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@lists.ozlabs.org
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2014-07-16 18:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-06-18 20:07 OF_DYNAMIC node lifecycle Grant Likely
2014-06-19  8:33 ` Pantelis Antoniou
2014-06-23 14:58   ` Grant Likely
2014-06-23 15:26     ` Pantelis Antoniou
2014-06-23 20:21       ` Grant Likely
2014-06-24 20:07     ` Nathan Fontenot
2014-06-25 20:22       ` Grant Likely
2014-06-26 19:59         ` Nathan Fontenot
2014-06-27 12:32           ` Grant Likely
2014-06-27 12:40             ` Pantelis Antoniou
2014-06-27 14:41               ` Nathan Fontenot
2014-06-19 15:26 ` Nathan Fontenot
2014-06-23 14:48   ` Grant Likely
2014-06-24 20:10     ` Nathan Fontenot
2014-06-25 20:24       ` Grant Likely
2014-06-26 20:01         ` Nathan Fontenot
2014-06-27 12:41           ` Grant Likely
2014-06-27 14:41             ` Nathan Fontenot
2014-07-16  5:33               ` Grant Likely
2014-07-16 18:30                 ` Tyrel Datwyler [this message]
2014-07-16 20:57                   ` Grant Likely
2014-07-16 22:26                     ` Grant Likely
2014-07-16 23:12                       ` Nathan Fontenot
2014-07-17  0:44                         ` Grant Likely

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=53C6C4BE.6010301@gmail.com \
    --to=turtle.in.the.kernel@gmail.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=nfont@austin.ibm.com \
    --cc=pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com \
    --cc=tyreld@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    /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).