[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87y0lz2ef6.ffs@tglx>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 14:28:29 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...nel.org>
To: Yicong Yang <yang.yicong@...oheart.com>, Anup Patel
<apatel@...tanamicro.com>
Cc: yang.yicong@...oheart.com, anup@...infault.org, pjw@...nel.org,
palmer@...belt.com, aou@...s.berkeley.edu, alex@...ti.fr,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
geshijian@...oheart.com, weidong.wd@...oheart.com, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip/riscv-aplic: Register the driver prior to
device creation
On Thu, Jan 15 2026 at 16:31, Yicong Yang wrote:
> so based on above, if we use async_wq (with async_schedule* APIs) in
> acpi_scan_clear_dep_queue() for creating these devices, the issue
> could be solved since we're sure to have these devices before entering
> userspace, since the barrier of async_synchronize_full(). This should be
> a solution with a conceptual support and I did a quick test on our
> platform it solves the issue.
Sounds about right to me. The drivers core and ACPI folks might have
opinions though :)
> As for the order of console_on_rootfs()/async_synchronize_full(),
> though our issue is not directly caused by it, it will cause the
> same issue (by the console open time the async probing maybe not
> finised) theoretically and needs to be fixed, is it?
Yes, that should move past the synchronization point.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists