From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@suse.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] amd64_edac: enforce synchronous probe
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 10:50:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150318175023.GE11485@dtor-ws> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150318174544.GD11485@dtor-ws>
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:45:44AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:56:18PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 03:33:15PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > From: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@suse.com>
> > >
> > > While testing asynchronous PCI probe on this driver I noticed it failed
> > > so enforce just synchronouse probe for now. Asynchronous probe is not
> > > used by default and requires userepace intervention. Patches for its
> > > support will be merged later.
> > >
> > > The reason async probe fails is that the init call for this driver
> > > relies on probe to have finished for at least one device. This needs to
> > > be addressed before enabling async probe.
> >
> > I'm still kinda uncomfortable with this both white and black list
> > behavior. If we're gonna do this, let's please drop the debug options
> > and build proper blacklists; otherwise, this will never be complete
> > and we're gonna left with the in-between situation forever.
>
> Without the debug options how can we do that? I will definitely not be
> able to go through all the in-tree drivers myself and see if they can be
> asynchronously probed or not. The most I can do is to try enabling the
> option on our side and fixing the drivers/subsystems that fail with
> asynchronous probing. This will be iterative process for some time and
> then we'll drop the debug option and flip the flag to do asynchronous
> probing by default.
By the way, at that point I think we should be able to remove the
FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS option (and maybe PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS as well?).
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-18 17:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-16 23:33 [PATCH 0/8] Asynchronous device/driver probing support Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 1/8] module: add extra argument for parse_params() callback Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 2/8] driver-core: add asynchronous probing support for drivers Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 3/8] driver-core: add driver module asynchronous probe support Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 4/8] driver-core: enable drivers to opt-out of async probe Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 5/8] driver-core: platform_driver_probe() must probe synchronously Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 6/8] amd64_edac: enforce synchronous probe Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 16:56 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-18 17:45 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 17:50 ` Dmitry Torokhov [this message]
2015-03-18 18:16 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-18 18:23 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 18:27 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-18 18:37 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 18:45 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-18 19:36 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 19:51 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-18 20:26 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 21:02 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-18 21:41 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 21:50 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-18 22:15 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 23:24 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-19 0:26 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-19 15:41 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-19 16:01 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-19 16:19 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-19 17:04 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 7/8] module: add core_param_unsafe Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-20 5:43 ` Rusty Russell
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 8/8] driver-core: allow forcing async probing for modules and builtins Dmitry Torokhov
2015-02-03 23:12 ` [PATCH 0/8] Asynchronous device/driver probing support Dmitry Torokhov
2015-02-07 10:06 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2015-03-03 21:18 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 16:46 ` Dmitry Torokhov
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-03-30 23:20 [PATCH v2 " Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-30 23:20 ` [PATCH 6/8] amd64_edac: enforce synchronous probe Dmitry Torokhov
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=20150318175023.GE11485@dtor-ws \
--to=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@suse.com \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--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