[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdXjWENrq0MW-DU2x7WnaCsWyipN4DO=y0ZTL+3G_fPYGg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 09:38:49 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Cc: Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com>,
Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
Matt Porter <matt.porter@...aro.org>,
Koen Kooi <koen@...inion.thruhere.net>,
Alison Chaiken <Alison_Chaiken@...tor.com>,
Dinh Nguyen <dinh.linux@...il.com>,
Jan Lubbe <jluebbe@...net.de>,
Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@....com>,
Michael Stickel <ms@...able.de>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@...il.com>,
Alan Tull <delicious.quinoa@...il.com>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Michael Bohan <mbohan@...eaurora.org>,
Ionut Nicu <ioan.nicu.ext@....com>,
Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>,
Matt Ranostay <mranostay@...il.com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Pete Popov <pete.popov@...sulko.com>,
Dan Malek <dan.malek@...sulko.com>,
Georgi Vlaev <georgi.vlaev@...sulko.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/8] OF: Introduce DT overlay support.
Hi Grant,
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 7:50 AM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca> wrote:
>> Why has the overlay system been designed for plugging and unpluging whole
>> overlays?
>> That means the kernel has to remember the full stack, causing issues with
>> e.g. kexec.
>
> Mostly so that drivers don't see any difference in the livetree data
> structure. It also means that userspace sees a single representation of
> the hardware at any given time.
Sorry, I don't follow the argument about the "single representation of the
hardware".
>> Why not allowing the addition of removal of subtrees of the full device
>> tree?
>
> Overlays is more than just a subtree. A single overlay can make
> manipulations of multiple subtrees that should be handled as logically
> atomic.
Sure, it's more complicated due to the atomicity of multiple changes.
>> This is similar to other hotpluggable subsystems (which are not necessarily
>> DT-based), like PCI Express. That way the kernel can pass a
>> DT-representation of the actual current device tree to a kexec'ed kernel.
>
> I'm not following you argument. Hardware hotplug systems like PCIe don't
> manipulate the firmware data. The kernel detects the new device and
> populates the Linux device model directly. Firmware provided data (ACPI
> or FDT) isn't involved.
I mean the kernel doesn't remember the exact order in a stack, to reverse
operations. E.g. I can add hotplug a PCIe bridge with multiple devices
behind it, and unplug a single device later. It's still one subtree, though.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists