public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@do-not-panic.com>,
	falcon@meizu.com, tiwai@suse.de, tj@kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, oleg@redhat.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp,
	joseph.salisbury@canonical.com, bpoirier@suse.de,
	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1 0/3] driver-core: add asynch module loading support
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2014 12:31:40 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140831193140.GA12678@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5403767E.1020107@linux.intel.com>

On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 12:24:46PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> >>before we added the current async approach the approach of async init calls was tried
> >>At the time, Linus hated it and he was right, it was not the right thing.
> >>
> >>What is different this time to make this the right thing to do ?
> >
> >Because otherwise drivers still have to do this, but open code it. Let's say I
> >have a long operations (i.e. for some touchpads it takes about 2 secs to reset
> >and configure it). I can offload that part into async_schedule() so it does not
> >stop initialization of the rest of the system (why would I want to delay
> >initializing of USB or storage system until touchpad is ready?) but if that
> >initialization fails we end up with partially bound driver and device that is
> >not really operable. I would very much prefer async and sync cases be the same
> >- if probe() fails the driver is not bound to the device.
> >
> >I think it is wrong to make async probing system-wide, but driver opt-in shoudl
> >be fine and right thing to do.
> >
> 
> I am completely fine if we make basically an async wrapper for
> pci_register_driver() and friends.. that would be convenient I suppose.
> 
> (but then again, in reality very few drivers take real time to init... most already
> do the heavy work in open(). Not all can, sure, but if you look at a bootgraph.pl
> graph of a typical boot it's only a few that matter).
> And many drivers need to register with a subsystem, and there's some ordering around that,
> and that's why we ended up with the async cookie stuff, so that you can do the
> heavy work in parallel, but order near the end at registeration-with-the-subsystem time.
> 
> But doing this on an initcall level was wrong back then, and I have yet to hear
> a reason why it would be right this time.

It's still wrong, it's not what I was thinking about when talking this
over with Luis and Dmitry, I think something got lost in the
translation...

thanks,

greg k-h

  reply	other threads:[~2014-08-31 19:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-08-31  9:03 [RFC v1 0/3] driver-core: add asynch module loading support Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-08-31  9:03 ` [RFC v1 1/3] driver-core: split module_init() and module_exit() Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-08-31  9:03 ` [RFC v1 2/3] async: move synchronous caller into a helper Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-08-31  9:03 ` [RFC v1 3/3] async: add driver asynch levels Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-08-31 10:13 ` [RFC v1 0/3] driver-core: add asynch module loading support Tejun Heo
2014-08-31 11:02   ` Tejun Heo
2014-08-31 11:05     ` Tejun Heo
2014-08-31 17:52       ` Dmitry Torokhov
2014-08-31 19:26         ` Arjan van de Ven
2014-08-31 20:11           ` Dmitry Torokhov
2014-08-31 11:25     ` David Herrmann
2014-08-31 11:38       ` Tejun Heo
2014-08-31 18:28   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2014-08-31 22:02     ` Tejun Heo
2014-08-31 23:06       ` Dmitry Torokhov
2014-08-31 23:40         ` Tejun Heo
2014-08-31 14:44 ` Arjan van de Ven
2014-08-31 17:50   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2014-08-31 19:24     ` Arjan van de Ven
2014-08-31 19:31       ` Greg KH [this message]
2014-08-31 20:14         ` Dmitry Torokhov
2014-08-31 20:40           ` Greg KH
2014-08-31 21:53             ` Tejun Heo
2014-08-31 22:15               ` Greg KH
2014-08-31 22:53                 ` Tejun Heo
2014-08-31 23:20                   ` Arjan van de Ven
2014-08-31 23:29                     ` Tejun Heo
2014-08-31 22:51               ` Dmitry Torokhov
2014-08-31 23:03                 ` Tejun Heo
2014-09-04 21:21             ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2014-09-04 21:52               ` Greg KH
2014-08-31 16:41 ` Greg KH
     [not found] <99jhsb6abtsilpt3j5nu991b.1409513632114@email.android.com>
2014-08-31 22:32 ` Arjan van de Ven
2014-08-31 22:45   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2014-08-31 22:48     ` Arjan van de Ven

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=20140831193140.GA12678@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=bpoirier@suse.de \
    --cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
    --cc=falcon@meizu.com \
    --cc=joseph.salisbury@canonical.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mcgrof@do-not-panic.com \
    --cc=mcgrof@suse.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
    --cc=tiwai@suse.de \
    --cc=tj@kernel.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