From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F908C43387 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 15:50:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20B472086D for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 15:50:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1547826651; bh=TQFy+vRH6KfWVlckG3F5pPytrOgcZBEmzbR5Jcl32/4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=hqX/1asuXI0RZMoKu+Hox4ZDFDLtDKGWx2qhbj91ty0HYmWaCfWZ9zODJ+p2s4eub a63Qr6/oMOjBx71Zj7dvJlDw7BPAkgR9GVfkMcXA+Gr3kwS7ybVfwo4uab7kFvcH1F 2XvNpueCUKVCxIlf0FwCSvSLcbKLhPwuiikrI/7k= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727954AbfARPut (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jan 2019 10:50:49 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:41836 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727529AbfARPup (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jan 2019 10:50:45 -0500 Received: from localhost (5356596B.cm-6-7b.dynamic.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 040A72087E; Fri, 18 Jan 2019 15:50:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1547826644; bh=TQFy+vRH6KfWVlckG3F5pPytrOgcZBEmzbR5Jcl32/4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=w+C4aKk2iFK2eOl0tXnfpgiFl2Kl54xLW7z1tDnNaVgFVcID5R/24yDkTPbmKk6Kd RFDjK9Ut6VzgP7jNskx1USYrFKg0rroCh7exz2UAj9vVnjHuxwPonXnp7Kq8ItPXb/ V17p36qJRsxuo8ec0oEt2FCILMHOTYlL94Yhdnds= Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 16:50:42 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Alexander Duyck Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "Luis R. Rodriguez" , "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" , Tejun Heo , Andrew Morton , Linux PM , Lai Jiangshan , Len Brown , Pavel Machek , zwisler@kernel.org, Dan Williams , dave.jiang@intel.com, bvanassche@acm.org Subject: Re: [driver-core PATCH v9 1/9] driver core: Establish order of operations for device_add and device_del via bitflag Message-ID: <20190118155042.GA5009@kroah.com> References: <154466182249.9126.3905559325944768059.stgit@ahduyck-desk1.jf.intel.com> <154466189880.9126.10737761541647369077.stgit@ahduyck-desk1.jf.intel.com> <20181220152844.GA27498@kroah.com> <0a72b8db91f9151ecc7f215b465ec8e69adc239c.camel@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0a72b8db91f9151ecc7f215b465ec8e69adc239c.camel@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.2 (2019-01-07) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 09:37:32AM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote: > On Thu, 2018-12-20 at 16:28 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 03:27:48PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 1:45 AM Alexander Duyck > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Add an additional bit flag to the device struct named "dead". > > > > > > > > This additional flag provides a guarantee that when a device_del is > > > > executed on a given interface an async worker will not attempt to attach > > > > the driver following the earlier device_del call. Previously this > > > > guarantee was not present and could result in the device_del call > > > > attempting to remove a driver from an interface only to have the async > > > > worker attempt to probe the driver later when it finally completes the > > > > asynchronous probe call. > > > > > > > > One additional change added was that I pulled the check for dev->driver > > > > out of the __device_attach_driver call and instead placed it in the > > > > __device_attach_async_helper call. This was motivated by the fact that the > > > > only other caller of this, __device_attach, had already taken the > > > > device_lock() and checked for dev->driver. Instead of testing for this > > > > twice in this path it makes more sense to just consolidate the dev->dead > > > > and dev->driver checks together into one set of checks. > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Dan Williams > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki > > > > It's too late for 4.21-rc1 as my tree should be closed by now. > > > > So I'll hold on to these in my queue until 4.21-rc1 is out and then > > queue them up and see what breaks in linux-next :) > > > > thanks, > > > > greg k-h > > I just wanted to check on on this patch set in terms of workflow. Since > it looks like we now have 5.0-rc1 out I was wondering what the ETA for > this patch set being pulled was, or if I need to resubmit the set. I'm reviewing it now, no need to resend... thanks, greg k-h