mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
To: Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>,
	Matt Porter <matt.porter@linaro.org>,
	Koen Kooi <koen@dominion.thruhere.net>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Alison Chaiken <Alison_Chaiken@mentor.com>,
	Dinh Nguyen <dinh.linux@gmail.com>, Jan Lubbe <jluebbe@lasnet.de>,
	Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@nsn.com>,
	Michael Stickel <ms@mycable.de>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
	Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@gmail.com>,
	Alan Tull <delicious.quinoa@gmail.com>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
	Michael Bohan <mbohan@codeaurora.org>,
	Ionut Nicu <ioan.nicu.ext@nsn.com>,
	Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu>,
	Matt Ranostay <mranostay@gmail.com>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Pete Popov <pete.popov@konsulko.com>,
	Dan Malek <dan.malek@konsulko.com>,
	Georgi Vlaev <georgi.vlaev@konsulko.com>,
	Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com>,
	Pantelis Antoniou <panto@antoniou-consulting.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] of: Only call notifiers when node is attached
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2014 21:39:25 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141105213925.3790BC41C40@trevor.secretlab.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1414528433-9650-4-git-send-email-pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com>

On Tue, 28 Oct 2014 22:33:51 +0200
, Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com>
 wrote:
> Make sure we call notifier only when the node is attached.
> When a detatched tree is being constructed we do not want the
> notifiers to fire at all.

The description does not match what the patch does. The patch moves the
test into of_{add,remove,update}_property() and out of
of_property_notify() itself. That leaves one other caller of
of_property_notify(); __of_changeset_entry_notify(). The effect of this
patch is that applying a changeset will cause notifiers to be fired for
each property modified in a changeset. The comment says nothing about
the change in behaviour and it sounds like it is a bug fix when it
doesn't actually change the behaviour at all for the
of_{add,remove,update}_property() paths.

This needs a better changelog. It needs to describe what the effects of
the patch are and why the change is being made. When someone is
bisecting a problem and they land on this change, the changelog needs to
give them a good idea about what is going on and why.

g.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com>
> ---
>  drivers/of/base.c    | 9 ++++++---
>  drivers/of/dynamic.c | 5 +----
>  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c
> index 2305dc0..a79d4ee 100644
> --- a/drivers/of/base.c
> +++ b/drivers/of/base.c
> @@ -1695,7 +1695,8 @@ int of_add_property(struct device_node *np, struct property *prop)
>  
>  	mutex_unlock(&of_mutex);
>  
> -	if (!rc)
> +	/* only call notifiers if the node is attached and no error occurred */
> +	if (of_node_is_attached(np) && !rc)
>  		of_property_notify(OF_RECONFIG_ADD_PROPERTY, np, prop, NULL);
>  
>  	return rc;
> @@ -1754,7 +1755,8 @@ int of_remove_property(struct device_node *np, struct property *prop)
>  
>  	mutex_unlock(&of_mutex);
>  
> -	if (!rc)
> +	/* only call notifiers if the node is attached and no error occurred */
> +	if (of_node_is_attached(np) && !rc)
>  		of_property_notify(OF_RECONFIG_REMOVE_PROPERTY, np, prop, NULL);
>  
>  	return rc;
> @@ -1830,7 +1832,8 @@ int of_update_property(struct device_node *np, struct property *newprop)
>  
>  	mutex_unlock(&of_mutex);
>  
> -	if (!rc)
> +	/* only call notifiers if the node is attached and no error occurred */
> +	if (of_node_is_attached(np) && !rc)
>  		of_property_notify(OF_RECONFIG_UPDATE_PROPERTY, np, newprop, oldprop);
>  
>  	return rc;
> diff --git a/drivers/of/dynamic.c b/drivers/of/dynamic.c
> index f297891..8e8b614 100644
> --- a/drivers/of/dynamic.c
> +++ b/drivers/of/dynamic.c
> @@ -90,10 +90,6 @@ int of_property_notify(int action, struct device_node *np,
>  {
>  	struct of_prop_reconfig pr;
>  
> -	/* only call notifiers if the node is attached */
> -	if (!of_node_is_attached(np))
> -		return 0;
> -
>  	pr.dn = np;
>  	pr.prop = prop;
>  	pr.old_prop = oldprop;
> @@ -138,6 +134,7 @@ int of_attach_node(struct device_node *np)
>  	__of_attach_node_sysfs(np);
>  	mutex_unlock(&of_mutex);
>  
> +	/* node is guaranteed to be attached at this point */
>  	of_reconfig_notify(OF_RECONFIG_ATTACH_NODE, np);
>  
>  	return 0;
> -- 
> 1.7.12
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2014-11-05 21:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-10-28 20:33 [PATCH 0/5] of: Resolver and dynamic updates Pantelis Antoniou
2014-10-28 20:33 ` [PATCH 1/5] of: resolver: Switch to new local fixups format Pantelis Antoniou
2014-10-28 20:33 ` [PATCH 2/5] of: testcases: Update with " Pantelis Antoniou
2014-10-28 20:33 ` [PATCH 3/5] of: Only call notifiers when node is attached Pantelis Antoniou
2014-11-05 21:39   ` Grant Likely [this message]
2014-11-06 12:33     ` Pantelis Antoniou
2014-11-06 12:47       ` Grant Likely
2014-10-28 20:33 ` [PATCH 4/5] of: Add old prop argument on OF_RECONFIG_UPDATE_PROPERTY Pantelis Antoniou
2014-11-05 20:01   ` Grant Likely
2014-11-05 20:08     ` Pantelis Antoniou
2014-11-06 12:46       ` Grant Likely
2014-11-06 13:14         ` Pantelis Antoniou
2014-10-28 20:33 ` [PATCH 5/5] of: of_reconfig_get_state_change() of notifier helper Pantelis Antoniou
2014-11-05 20:07   ` Grant Likely

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=20141105213925.3790BC41C40@trevor.secretlab.ca \
    --to=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
    --cc=Alison_Chaiken@mentor.com \
    --cc=alexander.sverdlin@nsn.com \
    --cc=dan.malek@konsulko.com \
    --cc=delicious.quinoa@gmail.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dinh.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=dirk.behme@gmail.com \
    --cc=georgi.vlaev@konsulko.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=ioan.nicu.ext@nsn.com \
    --cc=jluebbe@lasnet.de \
    --cc=koen@dominion.thruhere.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
    --cc=matt.porter@linaro.org \
    --cc=mbohan@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=monstr@monstr.eu \
    --cc=mranostay@gmail.com \
    --cc=ms@mycable.de \
    --cc=pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com \
    --cc=panto@antoniou-consulting.com \
    --cc=pete.popov@konsulko.com \
    --cc=robherring2@gmail.com \
    --cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
    /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®