From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>
Cc: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>, Kay Sievers <kay@vrfy.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: A workaround for request_firmware() stuck in module_init
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 13:59:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120906135957.2e705a9d@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACVXFVMbCOov6nFqmmVu+9QYXuGc_1uwYKLcevqERZw4CRvVCA@mail.gmail.com>
> Sorry, I don't see anyone explained clearly why request_firmware()
> can't be called inside module_init() in module case, so maybe it is
> a bit early to say it is a fix on 'bug', :-)
Because the firmware load may trigger a need to load a driver to load the
firmware.
> > dev_discard_firmware()
> >
> > so you an instance can drop its firmware reference if it doesn't need it
> > post probe.
>
> This kind of mechanism has been implemented already: request_firmware()
> and release_firmware() will get and put a refcount. And, the reference
> count is associated with firmware name, and it should be so, IMO.
Yes - so a dev_ firmware interface is very thin.
> > You broke suspend/resume for lots of devices.
>
> The firmware cache mechanism will keep the firmware during suspend/resume
> cycle to address the problem.
Ok
> For drivers, I understand request_firmware()/request_firmware_nowait()
> and release_firmware() are enough. If many devices share one firmware,
> there is only one firmware kept in memory for their requests if one holds
> the firmware, and there is a refcount for it already, :-)
>
> So I don't see why it is difficult to use request/release_firmware() inside
> drivers, :-)
The big problem can be summed up in one word "asynchronous". Having
either an automated handler for it before ->probe is called or having the
driver author cut and paste in
if (!dev_request_firmware(dev, blah))
return -EPROBE_DEFER;
avoids the need to deal with async completion after probe (and the
*horrible* case of
probe
request firmware
remove
firmware ready
)
in each driver
Having an auto unload for it at the end is just neatness. Perhaps in fact
it should be devm_request_firmware() and use the mechanism we have ?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-06 12:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-04 13:06 A workaround for request_firmware() stuck in module_init Takashi Iwai
2012-09-04 15:52 ` Ming Lei
2012-09-04 16:10 ` Takashi Iwai
2012-09-05 1:15 ` Ming Lei
2012-09-05 5:53 ` Takashi Iwai
2012-09-05 11:32 ` Ming Lei
2012-09-05 13:03 ` Alan Cox
2012-09-05 14:01 ` Takashi Iwai
2012-09-05 15:22 ` Ming Lei
2012-09-05 16:30 ` Alan Cox
2012-09-05 21:08 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-09-05 23:18 ` Alan Cox
2012-09-06 5:06 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-09-06 2:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2012-09-06 4:12 ` Ming Lei
2012-09-06 12:59 ` Alan Cox [this message]
2012-09-06 15:38 ` Ming Lei
2012-09-05 16:59 ` Lucas De Marchi
2012-09-05 17:09 ` Takashi Iwai
2012-09-05 16:51 ` Lucas De Marchi
2012-09-05 17:08 ` Takashi Iwai
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=20120906135957.2e705a9d@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk \
--to=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kay@vrfy.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@canonical.com \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=tiwai@suse.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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