From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>
Cc: kay.sievers@vrfy.org, greg@kroah.com, cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [PATCH/RESEND] driver core: remove polling for driver_probe_done(v4)
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 20:29:41 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090220202941.6c33b627@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d82e647a0902201728s5e57f02cs8f8c20567f914717@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 09:28:34 +0800
Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > you broke it i this revision though
> >
> >> -int wait_for_device_probe(void)
> >> +void driver_wait_probe_done(void)
> >> {
> >> - /* wait for the known devices to complete their probing */
> >> - while (driver_probe_done() != 0)
> >> - msleep(100);
> >> - async_synchronize_full();
> >> - return 0;
> >> + pr_debug("%s: probe_count = %d\n", __func__,
> >> + atomic_read(&probe_count));
> >> + wait_event(probe_waitqueue, atomic_read(&probe_count) == 0);
> >
> >
> > You lost the async_synchronize_full()!
>
> I patch patch-v2.6.29-rc5-next-20090220.gz against v2.6.29-rc5
> directly to build
> the linux-next tree(it is quicker for me),so I don't know why you add
> async_synchronize_full()
> in driver core and seems it doesn't matter with driver core.
I do not add it; you removed it!
(it is needed to synchronize both the pending probes AND the
asynchronous work; that is the point of the consolidation patches to do
all of this in one place)
>
> Would you mind that I resend a patch,which does
> async_synchronize_full() after
> driver_wait_probe_done() in do_mounts.c or do_mounts_md.c ?
that is not the right solution. The patch that introduced
wait_for_device_probe() was there to make sure it all happens in one
central location. To then decentralize this 2nd function call to all
locations that call the function does not make sense to me.....
--
Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-21 4:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-20 14:17 tom.leiming
2009-02-20 15:33 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-02-21 1:28 ` Ming Lei
2009-02-21 4:29 ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2009-02-21 8:21 ` Ming Lei
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=20090220202941.6c33b627@infradead.org \
--to=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=kay.sievers@vrfy.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tom.leiming@gmail.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®