linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com>
To: Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
	Qing Huang <qing.huang@oracle.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] device probe: add self triggered delayed work request
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 18:15:49 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <03e6a023-258b-9bbd-3c20-89b51b987ff3@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <57A92DB5.1080007@gmail.com>



On 8/8/2016 6:11 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 08/08/16 14:51, Qing Huang wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 08/08/2016 01:44 PM, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>> On 07/29/16 22:39, Qing Huang wrote:
>>>> In normal condition, the device probe requests kept in deferred
>>>> queue would only be triggered for re-probing when another new device
>>>> probe is finished successfully. This change will set up a delayed
>>>> trigger work request if the current deferred probe being added is
>>>> the only one in the queue. This delayed work request will try to
>>>> reactivate any device from the deferred queue for re-probing later.
>>>>
>>>> By doing this, if the last device being probed in system boot process
>>>> has a deferred probe error, this particular device will still be able
>>>> to be probed again.
>>> I am trying to understand the use case.
>>>
>>> Can you explain the scenario you are trying to fix?  If I understand
>>> correctly, you expect that something will change such that a later
>>> probe attempt will succeed.  How will that change occur and why
>>> will the deferred probe list not be processed in this case?
>>>
>>> Why are you conditioning this on the deferred_probe_pending_list
>>> being empty?
>>>
>>> -Frank
>>
>> It turns out one corner case which we worried about has already been
>> solved in the really_probe() function by comparing
>> 'deferred_trigger_count' values.
>>
>> Another use case we are investigating now: when we probe a device,
>> the main thread returns EPROBE_DEFER from the driver after we spawn a
>> child thread to do the actual init work. So we can initialize
>> multiple similar devices at the same time. After the child thread
>> finishes its task, we can call driver_deferred_probe_trigger()
>> directly from child thread to re-probe the
>> device(driver_deferred_probe_trigger() has to be exported though). Or
>> we could rely on something in this patch to re-probe the deferred
>> devices from the pending list...
>> What do you suggest?
>
> See commit 735a7ffb739b6efeaeb1e720306ba308eaaeb20e for how multi-threaded
> probes were intended to be handled.  I don't know if this approach is used
> much or even usable, but that is the framework that was created.
>
That infrastructure got removed as part of below commit :-(

commit 5adc55da4a7758021bcc374904b0f8b076508a11
Author: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
Date:   Tue Mar 27 03:02:51 2007 +0200

     PCI: remove the broken PCI_MULTITHREAD_PROBE option

     This patch removes the PCI_MULTITHREAD_PROBE option that had already
     been marked as broken.

     Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
     Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>

  reply	other threads:[~2016-08-09  1:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-07-30  5:39 [PATCH] device probe: add self triggered delayed work request Qing Huang
2016-08-08 20:44 ` Frank Rowand
2016-08-08 21:51   ` Qing Huang
2016-08-09  1:11     ` Frank Rowand
2016-08-09  1:15       ` Santosh Shilimkar [this message]
2016-08-09  7:16         ` Frank Rowand
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-08-08 10:42 Shamir Rabinovitch
2016-08-09  0:10 ` Qing Huang
2016-08-09 10:11   ` Shamir Rabinovitch
2016-08-09 20:57     ` Qing Huang

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=03e6a023-258b-9bbd-3c20-89b51b987ff3@oracle.com \
    --to=santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com \
    --cc=frowand.list@gmail.com \
    --cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=qing.huang@oracle.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).