From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
To: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrei Warkentin <awarkentin@vmware.com>,
Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>, Dilan Lee <dilee@nvidia.com>,
"G, Manjunath Kondaiah" <manjugk@ti.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Manjunath@jasper.es, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] drivercore: Add driver probe deferral mechanism
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 22:09:23 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111013040923.GE15829@ponder.secretlab.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACVXFVMnt-ChUDhawhoyMm-wJ8xSQAWs1c8ykzmyshfX49HEsw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 08:29:18PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 1:37 AM, Andrei Warkentin <awarkentin@vmware.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Greg KH" <greg@kroah.com>
> >> To: "Josh Triplett" <josh@joshtriplett.org>
> >> Cc: "G, Manjunath Kondaiah" <manjugk@ti.com>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, "Grant Likely"
> >> <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
> >> "Dilan Lee" <dilee@nvidia.com>, "Mark Brown" <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>, Manjunath@jasper.es
> >> Sent: Saturday, October 8, 2011 11:55:02 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] drivercore: Add driver probe deferral mechanism
> >>
> >
> > I'm a bit of a fly on the wall here, but I'm curious how this impacts suspend/resume.
> > device_initialize->device_pm_init are called from device_register, so certainly this
> > patch doesn't also ensure that the PM ordering matches probe ordering, which is bound
> > to break suspend, right? Was this ever tested with the OMAP target? Shouldn't the
>
> Inside device_add(), device_pm_add is called before bus_probe_device,
> so the patch can't change the device order in pm list, and just change
> the driver probe order.
That's the way it works now, but can it be reworked? It would be
possible to adjust the list order after successful probe. However,
I'm not clear on the ordering rules for the dpm_list. Right now it is
explicitly ordered to have parents before children, but as already
expressed, that doesn't accurately represent ordering constraints for
multiple device dependancies.
So, reordering the list would probably require maintaining the
existing parent-child ordering constraint, but to also shift
devices (and any possible children?) to be after drivers that are
already probed. That alone will be difficult to implement and get
right, but maybe the constraints can be simplified. It needs some
further thought.
g.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-13 4:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-07 5:33 [PATCH 0/5] Driver Probe Deferral Mechanism G, Manjunath Kondaiah
2011-10-07 5:33 ` [PATCH 1/5] drivercore: add new error value for deferred probe G, Manjunath Kondaiah
2011-10-07 6:43 ` Greg KH
2011-10-07 10:00 ` Mark Brown
2011-10-07 22:12 ` Grant Likely
2011-10-07 23:28 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-10-08 0:12 ` Greg KH
2011-10-09 22:59 ` Grant Likely
2011-10-10 1:06 ` Greg KH
2011-10-12 6:18 ` G, Manjunath Kondaiah
2011-10-13 4:10 ` Grant Likely
2011-10-07 5:33 ` [PATCH 2/5] drivercore: Add driver probe deferral mechanism G, Manjunath Kondaiah
2011-10-07 6:49 ` Greg KH
2011-10-07 20:57 ` Josh Triplett
2011-10-07 21:23 ` Greg KH
2011-10-08 4:03 ` Josh Triplett
2011-10-08 15:55 ` Greg KH
2011-10-08 18:18 ` Josh Triplett
2011-10-10 17:37 ` Andrei Warkentin
2011-10-11 12:29 ` Ming Lei
2011-10-13 4:09 ` Grant Likely [this message]
2011-10-13 14:18 ` Ming Lei
2011-10-13 14:31 ` Alan Stern
2011-10-13 15:21 ` Ming Lei
2011-10-13 16:04 ` Alan Stern
2011-10-14 0:13 ` Ming Lei
2011-10-13 17:15 ` Grant Likely
2011-10-13 18:16 ` Alan Stern
2011-10-13 18:28 ` Grant Likely
2011-10-14 15:39 ` Alan Stern
2011-10-14 16:17 ` Grant Likely
2011-10-14 16:33 ` Alan Stern
2011-10-14 17:20 ` Grant Likely
2011-10-14 17:33 ` Alan Stern
2011-10-14 18:25 ` Grant Likely
2011-10-14 18:39 ` Alan Stern
2011-10-14 19:07 ` Grant Likely
2011-10-14 18:56 ` David Daney
2011-10-14 19:03 ` Grant Likely
2011-10-14 19:09 ` David Daney
2011-10-14 15:37 ` Alan Stern
2011-10-12 7:04 ` G, Manjunath Kondaiah
2011-10-07 21:28 ` Grant Likely
2011-10-07 5:33 ` [PATCH 3/5] regulator: Support driver probe deferral G, Manjunath Kondaiah
2011-10-07 5:33 ` [PATCH 4/5] gpiolib: handle deferral probe error G, Manjunath Kondaiah
2011-10-07 10:06 ` Alan Cox
2011-10-07 22:09 ` Grant Likely
2011-10-12 6:14 ` G, Manjunath Kondaiah
2011-10-13 4:12 ` Grant Likely
2011-10-07 5:33 ` [PATCH 5/5] omap: hsmmc: use platform_driver_register G, Manjunath Kondaiah
2011-10-07 6:50 ` [PATCH 0/5] Driver Probe Deferral Mechanism Greg KH
2011-10-07 7:37 ` G, Manjunath Kondaiah
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-10-07 5:05 G, Manjunath Kondaiah
2011-10-07 5:05 ` [PATCH 2/5] drivercore: Add driver probe deferral mechanism G, Manjunath Kondaiah
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=20111013040923.GE15829@ponder.secretlab.ca \
--to=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=Manjunath@jasper.es \
--cc=awarkentin@vmware.com \
--cc=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=dilee@nvidia.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=manjugk@ti.com \
--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®