[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140928192247.GA28033@core.coreip.homeip.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2014 12:22:47 -0700
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...not-panic.com>
Cc: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, tiwai@...e.de, tj@...nel.org,
arjan@...ux.intel.com, teg@...m.no, rmilasan@...e.com,
werner@...e.com, oleg@...hat.com, hare@...e.com, bpoirier@...e.de,
santosh@...lsio.com, pmladek@...e.cz, dbueso@...e.com,
mcgrof@...e.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
Joseph Salisbury <joseph.salisbury@...onical.com>,
Kay Sievers <kay@...y.org>,
One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@...onical.com>,
Pierre Fersing <pierre-fersing@...rref.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Nagalakshmi Nandigama <nagalakshmi.nandigama@...gotech.com>,
Praveen Krishnamoorthy <praveen.krishnamoorthy@...gotech.com>,
Sreekanth Reddy <sreekanth.reddy@...gotech.com>,
Abhijit Mahajan <abhijit.mahajan@...gotech.com>,
Casey Leedom <leedom@...lsio.com>,
Hariprasad S <hariprasad@...lsio.com>,
MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@...gotech.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 5/5] driver-core: add driver asynchronous probe support
Hi Luis,
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 02:57:17PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> +static bool drv_enable_async_probe(struct device_driver *drv,
> + struct bus_type *bus)
> +{
> + struct module *mod;
> +
> + if (!drv->owner || drv->sync_probe)
> + return false;
This bit is one of the biggest issues I have with the patch set. Why async
probing is limited to modules only? I mentioned several times that we need
async probing for built-in drivers and the way you are structuring the flags
(async by default for modules, possibly opt-out of async for modules, forcibly
sync for built-in) it is hard to extend the infrastructure for built-in case.
Also, as far as I can see, you are only considering the case where driver is
being bound to already registered devices. If you have a module that creates a
device for a driver that is already loaded and takes long time to probe you
would still be probing synchronously even if driver/module requested async
behavior.
So for me it is NAK in the current form.
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists