Message-ID: <3e340ff1-e842-2521-4344-da62802d472f@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 15 Jul 2019 18:05:11 -0700
From:   Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
To:     Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Collins <collinsd@...eaurora.org>,
        Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] of/platform: Add functional dependency link from
 DT bindings

On 7/15/19 11:40 AM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> Replying again because the previous email accidentally included HTML.
> 
> Thanks for taking the time to reconsider the wording Frank. Your
> intention was clear to me in the first email too.
> 
> A kernel command line option can also completely disable this
> functionality easily and cleanly. Can we pick that as an option? I've
> an implementation of that in the v5 series I sent out last week.

Yes, Rob suggested a command line option for debugging, and I am fine with
that.  But even with that, I would like a lot of testing so that we have a
chance of finding systems that have trouble with the changes and could
potentially be fixed before impacting a large number of users.

-Frank

> 
> -Saravana
> 
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 7:39 AM Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 7/15/19 7:26 AM, Frank Rowand wrote:
>>> HiRob,
>>>
>>> Sorry for such a late reply...
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/1/19 8:25 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 6:32 PM Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 6:48 PM Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Add device-links after the devices are created (but before they are
>>>>>> probed) by looking at common DT bindings like clocks and
>>>>>> interconnects.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Automatically adding device-links for functional dependencies at the
>>>>>> framework level provides the following benefits:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Optimizes device probe order and avoids the useless work of
>>>>>>   attempting probes of devices that will not probe successfully
>>>>>>   (because their suppliers aren't present or haven't probed yet).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   For example, in a commonly available mobile SoC, registering just
>>>>>>   one consumer device's driver at an initcall level earlier than the
>>>>>>   supplier device's driver causes 11 failed probe attempts before the
>>>>>>   consumer device probes successfully. This was with a kernel with all
>>>>>>   the drivers statically compiled in. This problem gets a lot worse if
>>>>>>   all the drivers are loaded as modules without direct symbol
>>>>>>   dependencies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Supplier devices like clock providers, interconnect providers, etc
>>>>>>   need to keep the resources they provide active and at a particular
>>>>>>   state(s) during boot up even if their current set of consumers don't
>>>>>>   request the resource to be active. This is because the rest of the
>>>>>>   consumers might not have probed yet and turning off the resource
>>>>>>   before all the consumers have probed could lead to a hang or
>>>>>>   undesired user experience.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Some frameworks (Eg: regulator) handle this today by turning off
>>>>>>   "unused" resources at late_initcall_sync and hoping all the devices
>>>>>>   have probed by then. This is not a valid assumption for systems with
>>>>>>   loadable modules. Other frameworks (Eg: clock) just don't handle
>>>>>>   this due to the lack of a clear signal for when they can turn off
>>>>>>   resources. This leads to downstream hacks to handle cases like this
>>>>>>   that can easily be solved in the upstream kernel.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   By linking devices before they are probed, we give suppliers a clear
>>>>>>   count of the number of dependent consumers. Once all of the
>>>>>>   consumers are active, the suppliers can turn off the unused
>>>>>>   resources without making assumptions about the number of consumers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> By default we just add device-links to track "driver presence" (probe
>>>>>> succeeded) of the supplier device. If any other functionality provided
>>>>>> by device-links are needed, it is left to the consumer/supplier
>>>>>> devices to change the link when they probe.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  drivers/of/Kconfig    |  9 ++++++++
>>>>>>  drivers/of/platform.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>  2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/of/Kconfig b/drivers/of/Kconfig
>>>>>> index 37c2ccbefecd..7c7fa7394b4c 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/of/Kconfig
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/of/Kconfig
>>>>>> @@ -103,4 +103,13 @@ config OF_OVERLAY
>>>>>>  config OF_NUMA
>>>>>>         bool
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +config OF_DEVLINKS
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd prefer this not be a config option. After all, we want one kernel
>>>>> build that works for all platforms.
>>>>
>>>> We need a lot more changes before one kernel build can work for all
>>>> platforms. At least until then, I think we need this. Lot less chance
>>>> of breaking existing platforms before all the missing pieces are
>>>> created.
>>>>
>>>>> A kernel command line option to disable might be useful for debugging.
>>>>
>>>> Or we can have a command line to enable this for platforms that want
>>>> to use it and have it default off.
>>>
>>
>>> Given the fragility of the current boot sequence (without this patch set)
>>> and the potential breakage of existing systems, I think that if we choose
>>> to accept this patch set that it should first bake in the -next tree for
>>> at least one major release cycle.  Maybe even two major release cycles.
>>
>> I probably didn't state that very well.  I was trying to not sound like
>> I was accusing this patch series of being fragile.  The issue is that
>> adding the patches to systems that weren't expecting the new ordering
>> may cause boot problems for some systems.  I'm not concerned with
>> pointing fingers, just want to make sure that we proceed cautiously
>> until we know that the resulting system is robust.
>>
>> -Frank
>>
>>>
>>> -Frank
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> +       bool "Device links from DT bindings"
>>>>>> +       help
>>>>>> +         Common DT bindings like clocks, interconnects, etc represent a
>>>>>> +         consumer device's dependency on suppliers devices. This option
>>>>>> +         creates device links from these common bindings so that consumers are
>>>>>> +         probed only after all their suppliers are active and suppliers can
>>>>>> +         tell when all their consumers are active.
>>>>>> +
>>>>>>  endif # OF
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/of/platform.c b/drivers/of/platform.c
>>>>>> index 04ad312fd85b..a53717168aca 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/of/platform.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/of/platform.c
>>>>>> @@ -61,6 +61,57 @@ struct platform_device *of_find_device_by_node(struct device_node *np)
>>>>>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_find_device_by_node);
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  #ifdef CONFIG_OF_ADDRESS
>>>>>> +static int of_link_binding(struct device *dev, char *binding, char *cell)
>>>>>
>>>>> Under CONFIG_OF_ADDRESS seems like a strange location.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, but the rest of the file seems to be under this. So I'm not
>>>> touching that. I can probably move this function further down (close
>>>> to platform populate) if you want that.
>>>>>
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> +       struct of_phandle_args sup_args;
>>>>>> +       struct platform_device *sup_dev;
>>>>>> +       unsigned int i = 0, links = 0;
>>>>>> +       u32 dl_flags = DL_FLAG_AUTOPROBE_CONSUMER;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +       while (!of_parse_phandle_with_args(dev->of_node, binding, cell, i,
>>>>>> +                                          &sup_args)) {
>>>>>> +               i++;
>>>>>> +               sup_dev = of_find_device_by_node(sup_args.np);
>>>>>> +               if (!sup_dev)
>>>>>> +                       continue;
>>>>>> +               if (device_link_add(dev, &sup_dev->dev, dl_flags))
>>>>>> +                       links++;
>>>>>> +               put_device(&sup_dev->dev);
>>>>>> +       }
>>>>>> +       if (links < i)
>>>>>> +               return -ENODEV;
>>>>>> +       return 0;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +/*
>>>>>> + * List of bindings and their cell names (use NULL if no cell names) from which
>>>>>> + * device links need to be created.
>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> +static char *link_bindings[] = {
>>>>>
>>>>> const
>>>>
>>>> Ack
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_DEVLINKS
>>>>>> +       "clocks", "#clock-cells",
>>>>>> +       "interconnects", "#interconnect-cells",
>>>>>
>>>>> Planning to add others?
>>>>
>>>> Not in this patch.
>>>>
>>>> Regulators are the other big missing piece that I'm aware of now but
>>>> they need a lot of discussion (see email from David and my reply).
>>>>
>>>> Not sure what other resources are shared where they can be "turned
>>>> off" and cause devices set up at boot to fail. For example, I don't
>>>> think interrupts need functional dependency tracking because they
>>>> aren't really turned off by consumer 1 in a way that breaks things for
>>>> consumer 2. Just masked and the consumer 2 can unmask and use it once
>>>> it probes.
>>>>
>>>> I'm only intimately familiar with clocks, interconnects and regulators
>>>> (to some extent). I'm open to adding other supplier categories in
>>>> future patches as I educate myself of those or if other people want to
>>>> add support for more categories.
>>>>
>>>> -Saravana
>>>>
>>>>>> +#endif
>>>>>> +};
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int of_link_to_suppliers(struct device *dev)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> +       unsigned int i = 0;
>>>>>> +       bool done = true;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +       if (unlikely(!dev->of_node))
>>>>>> +               return 0;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +       for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(link_bindings) / 2; i++)
>>>>>> +               if (of_link_binding(dev, link_bindings[i * 2],
>>>>>> +                                       link_bindings[i * 2 + 1]))
>>>>>> +                       done = false;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +       if (!done)
>>>>>> +               return -ENODEV;
>>>>>> +       return 0;
>>>>>> +}
>>>>>> +
>>>>>>  /*
>>>>>>   * The following routines scan a subtree and registers a device for
>>>>>>   * each applicable node.
>>>>>> @@ -524,6 +575,7 @@ static int __init of_platform_default_populate_init(void)
>>>>>>         if (!of_have_populated_dt())
>>>>>>                 return -ENODEV;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +       platform_bus_type.add_links = of_link_to_suppliers;
>>>>>>         /*
>>>>>>          * Handle certain compatibles explicitly, since we don't want to create
>>>>>>          * platform_devices for every node in /reserved-memory with a
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 2.22.0.410.gd8fdbe21b5-goog
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists