mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: kay.sievers@vrfy.org, greg@kroah.com, cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [PATCH/RESEND] driver core: remove polling for  driver_probe_done(v4)
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2009 09:28:34 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d82e647a0902201728s5e57f02cs8f8c20567f914717@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090220073345.501247f7@infradead.org>

2009/2/20 Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>:
> On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 22:17:27 +0800
> tom.leiming@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> From: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>
>>
>> This patch adds a function : driver_wait_probe_done,
>> which waits on condition of probing done to replace
>> polling for driver_probe_done in fs initialization.
>>
>> There is no better way to avoid polling for
>> driver_probe_done _and_ existence of the root device,
>> so we does not replace the driver_probe_done with
>> driver_wait_probe_done in such special case.
>>
>> Removing polling in fs initialization may lead to
>> a faster boot.
>>
>> This patch is against the latest linux-next tree.
>
> you broke it i this revision though
>
>> -int wait_for_device_probe(void)
>> +void driver_wait_probe_done(void)
>>  {
>> -     /* wait for the known devices to complete their probing */
>> -     while (driver_probe_done() != 0)
>> -             msleep(100);
>> -     async_synchronize_full();
>> -     return 0;
>> +     pr_debug("%s: probe_count = %d\n", __func__,
>> +              atomic_read(&probe_count));
>> +     wait_event(probe_waitqueue, atomic_read(&probe_count) == 0);
>
>
> You lost the async_synchronize_full()!

I patch  patch-v2.6.29-rc5-next-20090220.gz against v2.6.29-rc5
directly to build
the linux-next tree(it is quicker for me),so I don't know why you add
async_synchronize_full()
 in driver core and  seems it doesn't matter with driver core.

Would you mind  that I resend a patch,which does
async_synchronize_full()  after
driver_wait_probe_done() in do_mounts.c or do_mounts_md.c ?

>
>
>> -     wait_for_device_probe();
>> +     driver_wait_probe_done();
>
> I also don't understand why you rename the function..
> wait_for_device_probe() is not a bad name ;)
> Sounds like a gratuitous change to me.

OK, I will use wait_for_device_probe().

>
>
> --
> Arjan van de Ven        Intel Open Source Technology Centre
> For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
> visit http://www.lesswatts.org
>



-- 
Lei Ming

  reply	other threads:[~2009-02-21  1:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-02-20 14:17 tom.leiming
2009-02-20 15:33 ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-02-21  1:28   ` Ming Lei [this message]
2009-02-21  4:29     ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-02-21  8:21       ` Ming Lei

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=d82e647a0902201728s5e57f02cs8f8c20567f914717@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=tom.leiming@gmail.com \
    --cc=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=kay.sievers@vrfy.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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®