From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To: "Grumbach, Emmanuel" <emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com>
Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
"Berg, Johannes" <johannes.berg@intel.com>,
"Coelho, Luciano" <luciano.coelho@intel.com>,
"tj@kernel.org" <tj@kernel.org>,
"arjan@linux.intel.com" <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
"ming.lei@canonical.com" <ming.lei@canonical.com>,
"zajec5@gmail.com" <zajec5@gmail.com>,
"jeyu@redhat.com" <jeyu@redhat.com>,
"rusty@rustcorp.com.au" <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
"pmladek@suse.com" <pmladek@suse.com>,
"gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
linuxwifi <linuxwifi@intel.com>,
"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/5] iwlwifi: fix request_module() use
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 19:15:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170221181541.GN31264@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0BA3FCBA62E2DC44AF3030971E174FB3A8F4DEAB@hasmsx107.ger.corp.intel.com>
On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 07:16:16AM +0000, Grumbach, Emmanuel wrote:
> >
> > a) just remove the print and use instead request_module_nowait() (this is
> > more in alignment of what your code actually does today; or
> >
> > b) fix the request_module() use so that the error print matches the
> > expected and proper recommended use of request_module() (what this patch
> > does)
> >
> > I prefer a) actually but I had to show what b) looked like first :)
>
> Me too. Let's do the simple thing. After all, it's been working for 5 years
> now (maybe more?) and I don't see a huge need to verify that the opmode
> module has been loaded. It is very unlikely to fail anyway, and in the case
> it did fail, it's not that we can do much from iwlwifi point of view.
I tend to agree with you on this, retries would be the only sensible thing to
do, but why do that -- the error should be logged right and addressed by any
upper layers. Its one reason to consider in the future adding verifiers
as built-in optional part of module loading.
> iwlwifi will stay loaded and sit idle since no opmode will be there to start
> using the hardware. We will keep having the device claimed, and will keep the
> interrupt registered and all that. No WiFi for you, but no harm caused
> either.
Fine by me. Will send follow up simple patches.
Luis
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-21 18:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-17 2:08 [RFC 0/5] iwlwifi: enhance final opmode work Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-17 2:08 ` [RFC 1/5] iwlwifi: fix drv cleanup on opmode registration failure Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-19 9:16 ` Grumbach, Emmanuel
2017-02-20 17:32 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-17 2:09 ` [RFC 2/5] iwlwifi: fix request_module() use Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-19 9:47 ` Grumbach, Emmanuel
2017-02-21 2:23 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-21 7:16 ` Grumbach, Emmanuel
2017-02-21 18:15 ` Luis R. Rodriguez [this message]
2017-02-21 20:17 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-22 0:18 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-22 2:09 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] iwlwifi: corner case fix and request module changes Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-22 2:09 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] iwlwifi: fix drv cleanup on opmode registration failure Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-22 2:09 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] iwlwifi: simplify requesting ops module Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-22 2:10 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] iwlwifi: share opmode start code Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-22 2:10 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] iwlwifi: share opmode start work code Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-22 2:10 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] iwlwifi: convert final opmode work into a workqueue Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-17 2:09 ` [RFC 3/5] iwlwifi: share opmode start work code Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-17 2:09 ` [RFC 4/5] iwlwifi: move opmode loading to shared routine Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-02-17 2:09 ` [RFC 5/5] iwlwifi: convert final opmode work into a workqueue Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-03-01 7:12 ` [RFC 0/5] iwlwifi: enhance final opmode work Johannes Berg
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=20170221181541.GN31264@wotan.suse.de \
--to=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jeyu@redhat.com \
--cc=johannes.berg@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxwifi@intel.com \
--cc=luciano.coelho@intel.com \
--cc=ming.lei@canonical.com \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=zajec5@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®