From: Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: sysfs deferred_probe attribute
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 18:26:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1484245571.10206.28.camel@codethink.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170112174142.GA23954@kroah.com>
On Thu, 2017-01-12 at 18:41 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 11:27:01AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > I just noticed that we have a new device attribute 'deferred_probe'
> > added in 4.10 with this commit:
> >
> > commit 6751667a29d6fd64afb9ce30567ad616b68ed789
> > Author: Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk>
> > Date: Tue Aug 16 14:34:18 2016 +0100
> >
> > driver core: Add deferred_probe attribute to devices in sysfs
> >
> > It is sometimes useful to know that a device is on the deferred probe
> > list rather than, say, not having a driver available. Expose this
> > information to user-space.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk>
> > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> >
> >
> > It seems like a bad idea to add an ABI for an internal kernel feature.
> > When/if we replace deferred probe with something better based on
> > functional dependencies are we going to keep this attr around? Or
> > remove it and assume no userspace uses it?
It should be removed then (and replaced with some kind of representation
of dependencies).
> > Perhaps it should be hidden
> > behind CONFIG_DEBUG or just make a debugfs file that lists the
> > deferred list. Then you wouldn't have to hunt for what got deferred.
>
> Ah, debugfs would be nice, I'd much prefer that. I don't know how Ben
> is using this, but I think that would make more sense to me.
I'm not using it any programmatic way, and don't intend to. debugfs
would be OK, but attaching it to devices was easy to do and seemed to
make sense.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Software Developer, Codethink Ltd.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-12 18:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-12 17:27 sysfs deferred_probe attribute Rob Herring
2017-01-12 17:41 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-01-12 18:26 ` Ben Hutchings [this message]
2017-01-13 7:42 ` Tomeu Vizoso
2017-01-14 13:15 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-01-12 19:46 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
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=1484245571.10206.28.camel@codethink.co.uk \
--to=ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
--cc=tomeu.vizoso@collabora.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