linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drivercore: Add driver probe deferral mechanism

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20110704174126.GA26533@suse.de>
Date:	Mon, 4 Jul 2011 10:41:26 -0700
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Cc:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivercore: Add driver probe deferral mechanism

On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 11:11:59AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> Allow drivers to report at probe time that they cannot get all the resources
> required by the device, and should be retried at a later time.

When is "later"?

And why would a driver not be able to get all of the proper resources?

Why can't a bus, at a later time, just try to reprobe everything when it
determines that it is a "later" time now, without having to do this
added change to the core?

> This should completely solve the problem of getting devices
> initialized in the right order.  Right now this is mostly handled by
> mucking about with initcall ordering which is a complete hack, and
> doesn't even remotely handle the case where device drivers are in
> modules.  This approach completely sidesteps the issues by allowing
> driver registration to occur in any order, and any driver can request
> to be retried after a few more other drivers get probed.

Why would drivers in modules be an issue?  If a driver depends on
another driver, making it a module dependancy would solve the problem,
right?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/