From: Sagar Dharia <sdharia@codeaurora.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
bp@suse.de, poeschel@lemonage.de, treding@nvidia.com,
gong.chen@linux.intel.com, andreas.noever@gmail.com,
alan@linux.intel.com, mathieu.poirier@linaro.org,
daniel@ffwll.ch, oded.gabbay@amd.com, jkosina@suse.cz,
sharon.dvir1@mail.huji.ac.il, joe@perches.com,
davem@davemloft.net, james.hogan@imgtec.com,
michael.opdenacker@free-electrons.com,
daniel.thompson@linaro.org, nkaje@codeaurora.org,
kheitke@audience.com, mlocke@codeaurora.org,
agross@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] SLIMbus: Device management on SLIMbus
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 11:10:09 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5581A9F1.6010301@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150617114501.GB3214@sirena.org.uk>
On 6/17/2015 5:45 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 09:22:31AM -0600, Sagar Dharia wrote:
>> On 6/15/2015 4:54 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 11:49:16PM -0600, Sagar Dharia wrote:
>>>> +void slim_ctrl_add_boarddevs(struct slim_controller *ctrl)
>>>> +{
>>> Why are these operations split?
>> Some slaves may choose to do expensive operations in their probes (or wait
>> for logical address assignment). That will delay/block controller
>> registration and further HW initialization of the controller.
>> I did not see any downside/side-effect in splitting them. I am open however
>> to have them combined if that's the preferred way.
> How does this resolve the issue? As far as I can see it just shuffles
> it around so any delay happens later (and possibly not at a convenient
> time), possibly not helping if there's multiple controllers. If devices
> are doing excessively expensive things in their probe that seems like
> something that we should fix in the drivers. For LA assignment
> shouldn't we be addressing that by having a callback when the LA is
> assigned? That will avoid single threading effects and is more like the
> pattern for other buses. Slimbus isn't particularly unique in this
> regard.
I agree that using the 'device_up' callback (it's called when the device
has LA assignment) will make sure slaves can keep their probes non-blocking.
I was just trying to accommodate that blocking call by slaves and did
not realize the downside you now mentioned about multiple-controllers
I will combine these in next patchset.
Thanks
Sagar
>
> Greg, the LA assignment thing here is an example of the issue is an
> example of the pattern I raised a while ago (but never got round to
> coding up handling of) where we have devices on an enumerable bus with
> static registrations. LA assignment is the end of the hotplug process
> for a Slimbus device but most devices will need something doing to power
> them up so they enumerate.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-17 17:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-14 5:49 [PATCH 0/3] Introduce framework for SLIMbus device drivers Sagar Dharia
2015-06-14 5:49 ` [PATCH 1/3] SLIMbus: Device management on SLIMbus Sagar Dharia
2015-06-15 10:54 ` Mark Brown
2015-06-16 15:22 ` Sagar Dharia
2015-06-17 11:45 ` Mark Brown
2015-06-17 17:10 ` Sagar Dharia [this message]
2015-06-18 21:23 ` Srinivas Kandagatla
2015-06-19 3:48 ` Sagar Dharia
2015-06-14 5:49 ` [PATCH 2/3] of/slimbus: OF helper for SLIMbus Sagar Dharia
2015-06-15 10:55 ` Mark Brown
2015-06-14 5:49 ` [PATCH 3/3] slimbus: Add messaging APIs to slimbus framework Sagar Dharia
2015-06-15 11:08 ` Mark Brown
2015-06-14 15:32 ` [PATCH 0/3] Introduce framework for SLIMbus device drivers Greg KH
2015-06-15 11:27 ` Mark Brown
[not found] <E1Z47g1-0006FM-D4@feisty.vs19.net>
2015-06-14 13:20 ` [PATCH 1/3] SLIMbus: Device management on SLIMbus Joe Perches
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=5581A9F1.6010301@codeaurora.org \
--to=sdharia@codeaurora.org \
--cc=agross@codeaurora.org \
--cc=alan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andreas.noever@gmail.com \
--cc=bp@suse.de \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel.thompson@linaro.org \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gong.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=james.hogan@imgtec.com \
--cc=jkosina@suse.cz \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=kheitke@audience.com \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.poirier@linaro.org \
--cc=michael.opdenacker@free-electrons.com \
--cc=mlocke@codeaurora.org \
--cc=nkaje@codeaurora.org \
--cc=oded.gabbay@amd.com \
--cc=poeschel@lemonage.de \
--cc=sharon.dvir1@mail.huji.ac.il \
--cc=treding@nvidia.com \
/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