[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200513170505.GB1369204@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 19:05:05 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc: Al Cooper <alcooperx@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...el.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/5] usb: xhci: Change the XHCI link order in the
Makefile
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 09:31:11AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>
>
> On 5/13/2020 9:27 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 08:08:07AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 5/13/2020 5:26 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >>> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 11:00:15AM -0400, Al Cooper wrote:
> >>>> Some BRCMSTB USB chips have an XHCI, EHCI and OHCI controller
> >>>> on the same port where XHCI handles 3.0 devices, EHCI handles 2.0
> >>>> devices and OHCI handles <2.0 devices. Currently the Makefile
> >>>> has XHCI linking at the bottom which will result in the XHIC driver
> >>>> initalizing after the EHCI and OHCI drivers and any installed 3.0
> >>>> device will be seen as a 2.0 device. Moving the XHCI linking
> >>>> above the EHCI and OHCI linking fixes the issue.
> >>>
> >>> What happens if all of these are modules and they are loaded in a
> >>> different order? This makefile change will not help with that, you need
> >>> to have logic in the code in order to properly coordinate this type of
> >>> mess, sorry.
> >>
> >> I believe we should be using module soft dependencies to instruct the
> >> module loaders to load the modules in the correct order, so something
> >> like this would do (not tested) for xhci-plat-hcd.c:
> >>
> >> MODULE_SOFTDEP("post: ehci-hcd ohci-hcd");
> >>
> >> and I am not sure whether we need to add the opposite for ehci-hcd and
> >> ohci-hcd:
> >>
> >> MODULE_SOFTDEP("pre: xhci-plat-hcd");
> >
> > That's a nice start, but what happens if that isn't honored? This
> > really needs to work properly for any order as you never can guarantee
> > module/driver loading order in a system of modules.
>
> I also suggested that device links may help, though I am not sure. What
> do you suggest to be done?
No idea. device links will help if you defer the probe properly until
you see the proper drivers binding correctly.
good luck!
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists