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=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no 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 CB15DC43457 for ; Thu, 8 Oct 2020 17:21:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68BEF221FE for ; Thu, 8 Oct 2020 17:21:21 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1602177681; bh=r/KkSkcvl53CX08vt3Y25ViL49a+viUGbLz4eACO1Ls=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=MTSFyEsJFi/3CfzGrnSbWSqaKYi+7vhFH2i4yEAgtPJH/O09i14BZSEYxT6akQJzJ 2SMS+Oq/a2nE5ib62sYuy76UuAPRy6otjWi53GTu2hwLUOatIRHJwHerMX5OtMFPO4 JQB8OjO6N1flQ2yRnbegi5XUy+blWZA975YKVhTQ= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731935AbgJHRVU (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Oct 2020 13:21:20 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:40334 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728780AbgJHRVU (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Oct 2020 13:21:20 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [213.57.247.131]) (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 87664204EF; Thu, 8 Oct 2020 17:21:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1602177679; bh=r/KkSkcvl53CX08vt3Y25ViL49a+viUGbLz4eACO1Ls=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ksgfa9NUqyj68Pu9HFy/hcUX3Q+81kAbQHK+Upql6RAIZo1B9Lh6zD0utgGWByKf7 pEUIcsQWgiA//JRpMhgwWUG0C1okBG1Q2mYlY3zwAnWyi13FQEaLdwcz4r/MWO5608 qKWQCC80yiheruenmrfSyNuaPr7k86ULkEz2Nv5Y= Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 20:21:15 +0300 From: Leon Romanovsky To: "Ertman, David M" Cc: "Williams, Dan J" , Parav Pandit , Pierre-Louis Bossart , "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" , "parav@mellanox.com" , "tiwai@suse.de" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "ranjani.sridharan@linux.intel.com" , "fred.oh@linux.intel.com" , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , "dledford@redhat.com" , "broonie@kernel.org" , Jason Gunthorpe , "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" , "kuba@kernel.org" , "Saleem, Shiraz" , "davem@davemloft.net" , "Patil, Kiran" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] Add ancillary bus support Message-ID: <20201008172115.GP13580@unreal> References: <20201007192610.GD3964015@unreal> <20201008052137.GA13580@unreal> <20201008070032.GG13580@unreal> <20201008080010.GK13580@unreal> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 04:42:48PM +0000, Ertman, David M wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Leon Romanovsky > > Sent: Thursday, October 8, 2020 1:00 AM > > To: Williams, Dan J > > Cc: Ertman, David M ; Parav Pandit > > ; Pierre-Louis Bossart > louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>; alsa-devel@alsa-project.org; > > parav@mellanox.com; tiwai@suse.de; netdev@vger.kernel.org; > > ranjani.sridharan@linux.intel.com; fred.oh@linux.intel.com; linux- > > rdma@vger.kernel.org; dledford@redhat.com; broonie@kernel.org; Jason > > Gunthorpe ; gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; > > kuba@kernel.org; Saleem, Shiraz ; > > davem@davemloft.net; Patil, Kiran > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] Add ancillary bus support > > > > On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 12:38:00AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 12:01 AM Leon Romanovsky > > wrote: > > > [..] > > > > All stated above is my opinion, it can be different from yours. > > > > > > Yes, but we need to converge to move this forward. Jason was involved > > > in the current organization for registration, Greg was angling for > > > this to be core functionality. I have use cases outside of RDMA and > > > netdev. Parav was ok with the current organization. The SOF folks > > > already have a proposed incorporation of it. The argument I am hearing > > > is that "this registration api seems hard for driver writers" when we > > > have several driver writers who have already taken a look and can make > > > it work. If you want to follow on with a simpler wrappers for your use > > > case, great, but I do not yet see anyone concurring with your opinion > > > that the current organization is irretrievably broken or too obscure > > > to use. > > > > Can it be that I'm first one to use this bus for very large driver (>120K LOC) > > that has 5 different ->probe() flows? > > > > For example, this https://lore.kernel.org/linux- > > rdma/20201006172317.GN1874917@unreal/ > > hints to me that this bus wasn't used with anything complex as it was initially > > intended. > > > > And regarding registration, I said many times that init()/add() scheme is ok, > > the inability > > to call to uninit() after add() failure is not ok from my point of view. > > So, to address your concern of not being able to call an uninit after a add failure > I can break the unregister flow into two steps also. An uninit and a delete to mirror > the registration process's init and add. > > Would this make the registration and un-registration flow acceptable? Yes, sure. > > -DaveE > > > > > > > Thanks