From: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, <patches@opensource.cirrus.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: wm8994: Use PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2023 17:45:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230323174531.GM68926@ediswmail.ad.cirrus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAD=FV=UYO1KaoAZ7o5cA83SC1VHRomvJfaXVWyYPKrEZHyNNjg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 09:53:18AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 4:40 AM Charles Keepax
> If my analysis is correct, there's still potential to run into similar
> problems even with PROBE_FORCE_SYNCHRONOUS. I don't think that
> mfd_add_devices() is _guaranteed_ to finish probing all the
> sub-devices by the time it returns. Specifically, imagine that
> wm8994_ldo_probe() tries to get a GPIO that that system hasn't made
> available yet. Potentially the system could return -EPROBE_DEFER there
> and that would put the LDO on the deferred probe list. Doing so won't
> cause mfd_add_devices() to fail. Now we'll end up with a dummy
> regulator again. Admittedly most cases GPIO providers probe really
> early and so this argument is a bit of a stretch, but I guess the
> point is that there's no official guarantee that mfd_add_devices()
> will finish probing all sub-devices so it's not ideal to rely on.
> Also, other drivers with a similar pattern might have other reasons to
> -EPROBE_DEFER.
>
> These types of issues are the same ones I faced with DP AUX bus and
> the solutions were never super amazing...
>
> One solution we ended up with for the DP AUX bus was to add a
> "done_probing" callback argument to devm_of_dp_aux_populate_bus().
> This allowed the parent to be called back when all the children were
> done probing. This implementation is easier for DP AUX bus than it
> would be in the generic MFD case, but conceivably it would be possible
> there too?
>
> Another possible solution is to somehow break the driver up into more
> sub-drivers. Essentially, you have a top-level "wm8994" that's not
> much more than a container. Then you create a new-sub-device and
> relegate anything that needs the regulators to the new sub-device. The
> new sub-device can just -EPROBE_DEFER until it detects that the
> regulators have finished probing. I ended up doing stuff like this for
> "ti-sn65dsi86.c" using the Linux aux bus (not to be confused with the
> DP Aux bus) and it was a bit odd but worked OK.
Yes I believe you are correct, there is still an issue here,
indeed a quick test suggests I can still cause this by forcing a
probe defer in the regulator driver.
I think really the best place to look at this would be at the
regulator level. It is fine if mfd_add_devices passes, the problem
really is that the regulator core doesn't realise the regulator is
going to be arriving, and thus returns a dummy regulator, rather
than returning EPROBE_DEFER. If it did the MFD driver would probe
defer at the point of requesting the regulator, which would all
make sense.
I will see if I can find some time to think about that further
but very unlikely to happen this week.
Thanks,
Charles
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-23 17:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20230323083330eucas1p1f7e3f9beb5ba168c6b13374d74c158f0@eucas1p1.samsung.com>
2023-03-23 8:33 ` Marek Szyprowski
2023-03-23 11:40 ` Charles Keepax
2023-03-23 16:53 ` Doug Anderson
2023-03-23 16:57 ` Mark Brown
2023-03-23 17:45 ` Charles Keepax [this message]
2023-03-23 17:49 ` Mark Brown
2023-03-24 9:21 ` Charles Keepax
2023-03-23 18:00 ` Doug Anderson
2023-03-24 9:23 ` Charles Keepax
2023-03-24 15:06 ` Doug Anderson
2023-03-24 15:44 ` Charles Keepax
2023-03-23 13:49 ` Mark Brown
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=20230323174531.GM68926@ediswmail.ad.cirrus.com \
--to=ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=patches@opensource.cirrus.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®