[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19c99a6e-51c3-68d7-d1d6-640aae754c14@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 10:16:25 -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>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Collins <collinsd@...eaurora.org>,
Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/7] of/platform: Add functional dependency link from
DT bindings
On 8/15/19 6:50 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 7:06 PM Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 7/23/19 5:10 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>>> Add device-links after the devices are created (but before they are
>>> probed) by looking at common DT bindings like clocks and
>>> interconnects.
< very big snip (lots of comments that deserve answers) >
>>
>> /**
>> * of_link_property - TODO:
>> * dev:
>> * con_np:
>> * prop:
>> *
>> * TODO...
>> *
>> * Any failed attempt to create a link will NOT result in an immediate return.
>> * of_link_property() must create all possible links even when one of more
>> * attempts to create a link fail.
>>
>> Why? isn't one failure enough to prevent probing this device?
>> Continuing to scan just results in extra work... which will be
>> repeated every time device_link_check_waiting_consumers() is called
>
> Context:
> As I said in the cover letter, avoiding unnecessary probes is just one
> of the reasons for this patch. The other (arguably more important)
Agree that it is more important.
> reason for this patch is to make sure suppliers know that they have
> consumers that are yet to be probed. That way, suppliers can leave
> their resource on AND in the right state if they were left on by the
> bootloader. For example, if a clock was left on and at 200 MHz, the
> clock provider needs to keep that clock ON and at 200 MHz till all the
> consumers are probed.
>
> Answer: Let's say a consumer device Z has suppliers A, B and C. If the
> linking fails at A and you return immediately, then B and C could
> probe and then figure that they have no more consumers (they don't see
> a link to Z) and turn off their resources. And Z could fail
> catastrophically.
Then I think that this approach is fatally flawed in the current implementation.
A device can be added by a module that is loaded. In that case the device
was not present at late boot when the suppliers may turn off their resources.
(I am assuming the details since I have not reviewed the patches later in
the series that implement this part.)
Am I missing something?
If I am wrong, then I'll have more comments for your review replies for
patches 2 and 3.
>
< another snip >
> Thanks,
> Saravana
>
-Frank
Powered by blists - more mailing lists