From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@suse.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] amd64_edac: enforce synchronous probe
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 17:50:28 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150318215028.GF25365@htj.duckdns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150318214126.GJ11485@dtor-ws>
Hello, Dmitry.
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 02:41:26PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> You are over-stating the boot order guarantees that storage provides.
> Yes, you can scan devices and partitions simultaneously on the same
> controller, but it will break if controllers are registered in different
> order. And if you are delaying registering cone controller because
> another that you consider "first" has not done probing, you are stalling
> the boot process. It may be OK for "leaf" devices, which disks are
> usually are, bit not when you delaying initialization of a device that
> is in a middle of the device tree.
Can't we make it "transitive"? Split ->probe() into two parts so that
attaching the leaf devices run from the completion part of the split
->probe(). Sure, a lot of userlands we have nowadays can handle probe
order changing but we stil have use cases where the order matters.
Why introduce two separate behaviors when we can make the pararell
ordering transitive?
Doing things based on a big switch is going to create two largely
separate modes of operations. For a lot of cases, the gain in boot
time might not be enough to turn on the switch and we sure can't
default to turning it on. This is a deviation we can avoid with
reasonable amount of effort. The trade-off seems pretty clear to me.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-03-18 21:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-16 23:33 [PATCH 0/8] Asynchronous device/driver probing support Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 1/8] module: add extra argument for parse_params() callback Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 2/8] driver-core: add asynchronous probing support for drivers Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 3/8] driver-core: add driver module asynchronous probe support Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 4/8] driver-core: enable drivers to opt-out of async probe Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 5/8] driver-core: platform_driver_probe() must probe synchronously Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 6/8] amd64_edac: enforce synchronous probe Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 16:56 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-18 17:45 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 17:50 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 18:16 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-18 18:23 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 18:27 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-18 18:37 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 18:45 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-18 19:36 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 19:51 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-18 20:26 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 21:02 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-18 21:41 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 21:50 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2015-03-18 22:15 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 23:24 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-19 0:26 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-19 15:41 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-19 16:01 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-19 16:19 ` Tejun Heo
2015-03-19 17:04 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 7/8] module: add core_param_unsafe Dmitry Torokhov
2015-01-20 5:43 ` Rusty Russell
2015-01-16 23:33 ` [PATCH 8/8] driver-core: allow forcing async probing for modules and builtins Dmitry Torokhov
2015-02-03 23:12 ` [PATCH 0/8] Asynchronous device/driver probing support Dmitry Torokhov
2015-02-07 10:06 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2015-03-03 21:18 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-18 16:46 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-30 23:20 [PATCH v2 " Dmitry Torokhov
2015-03-30 23:20 ` [PATCH 6/8] amd64_edac: enforce synchronous probe Dmitry Torokhov
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=20150318215028.GF25365@htj.duckdns.org \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@suse.com \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
/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®