linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: "Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@suse.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	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 8/8] driver-core: allow enabling async probing for all modules and builtins
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 09:44:59 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150520164459.GC23809@dtor-ws> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150520072734.GA13083@kroah.com>

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 12:27:34AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 04:20:10PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@suse.com>
> > 
> > Folks wishing to test enabling async probe for all built-in drivers
> > and/or for all modules can use
> > __DEBUG__kernel_force_builtin_async_probe or
> > __DEBUG__kernel_force_modules_async_probe kernel parameters.
> > 
> > Activating either one will taint your kernel.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@suse.com>
> > [Dmitry: split off from another patch, split into 2 parameters, moved
> > over to core_param_unsafe()]
> > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
> 
> I've dropped this from my tree as I don't want to add these options,
> only to have to remove them later on when it's found out that these were
> a bad idea.

OK.

>
> I don't want to create a user api that we have to keep around for
> forever, and this would be such a thing (specifying how the kernel
> probing works.)

Given that they are marked as __DEBUG and taint the kernel I do not
believe they shoudl be considered as an API/ABI. We can emphasise this
in docs and/or kernel messages.

>  For debugging, can't you just patch up your kernel and

I can, but I do not have all hardware in my possession to validate the
behavior.

> test this out?  What's the real use of this?  Who do you want to enable
> these?  And why?  What will you do with the information?

The expectation was that distribution developers might use these
switches when evaluating whether they are ready to switch to
asynchronous probing.

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry

  reply	other threads:[~2015-05-20 16:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-30 23:20 [PATCH v2 0/8] Asynchronous device/driver probing support Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-30 23:20 ` [PATCH 1/8] module: add extra argument for parse_params() callback Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-30 23:20 ` [PATCH 2/8] driver-core: add asynchronous probing support for drivers Dmitry Torokhov
2015-05-29 10:48   ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-05-29 13:23     ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-06-01 12:04       ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-07-06 23:41         ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-06-27 23:45   ` Dan Williams
2015-07-03 18:30     ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-07-06 23:33     ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-30 23:20 ` [PATCH 3/8] driver-core: add driver module asynchronous probe support Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-30 23:20 ` [PATCH 4/8] driver-core: enable drivers to opt-out of async probe Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-30 23:20 ` [PATCH 5/8] driver-core: platform_driver_probe() must probe synchronously Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-30 23:20 ` [PATCH 6/8] amd64_edac: enforce synchronous probe Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-30 23:20 ` [PATCH 7/8] module: add core_param_unsafe Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-30 23:20 ` [PATCH 8/8] driver-core: allow enabling async probing for all modules and builtins Dmitry Torokhov
2015-05-20  7:27   ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2015-05-20 16:44     ` Dmitry Torokhov [this message]
2015-05-21  4:34       ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2015-05-21 19:02         ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2015-03-31 20:39 ` [PATCH v2 0/8] Asynchronous device/driver probing support Tejun Heo
2015-04-06 16:22   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-04-06 17:45     ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2015-05-18 21:48       ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-05-19  0:53         ` Greg Kroah-Hartman

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=20150520164459.GC23809@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).