[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4hWNk-avNOPdWBNND9Bd9nebzs2A4Weveqy289gM+A1Bw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 07:59:35 -0700
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <liam.r.girdwood@...ux.intel.com>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] driver core: export driver_deferred_probe_trigger()
On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 7:52 AM Pierre-Louis Bossart
<pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >>> The issue is that the driver core is using drivers completing probe as a
> >>> proxy for resources becoming available. That works most of the time
> >>> because most probes are fully synchronous but it breaks down if a
> >>> resource provider registers resources outside of probe, we might still
> >>> be fine if system boot is still happening and something else probes but
> >>> only through luck.
> >
> >> The driver core is not using that as a proxy, that is up to the driver
> >> itself or not. All probe means is "yes, this driver binds to this
> >> device, thank you!" for that specific bus/class type. That's all, if
> >> the driver needs to go off and do real work before it can properly
> >> control the device, wonderful, have it go and do that async.
> >
> > Right, which is what is happening here - but the deferred probe
> > machinery in the core is reading more into the probe succeeding than it
> > should.
>
> I think Greg was referring to the use of the PROBE_PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS
> probe type. We tried just that and got a nice WARN_ON because we are
> using request_module() to deal with HDaudio codecs. The details are in
> [1] but the kernel code is unambiguous...
>
> /*
> * We don't allow synchronous module loading from async. Module
> * init may invoke async_synchronize_full() which will end up
> * waiting for this task which already is waiting for the module
> * loading to complete, leading to a deadlock.
> */
> WARN_ON_ONCE(wait && current_is_async());
>
>
> The reason why we use a workqueue is because we are otherwise painted in
> a corner by conflicting requirements.
>
> a) we have to use request_module()
> b) we cannot use the async probe because of the request_module()
> c) we have to avoid blocking on boot
>
> I understand the resistance to exporting this function, no one in our
> team was really happy about it, but no one could find an alternate
> solution. If there is something better, I am all ears.
Additionally you mentioned that the consumer is unknown to the
producer, so you are not able, for example, to use the newly exported
device_driver_attach() to directly trigger the unblocked dependency.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists