All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dominique MARTINET <dominique.martinet@atmark-techno.com>
To: "Alice Guo (OSS)" <alice.guo@oss.nxp.com>
Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
	"robh+dt@kernel.org" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>, dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [EXT] regression due to soc_device_match not handling defer (Was: [PATCH v4 4/4] soc: imx8m: change to use platform driver)
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 10:27:58 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YHeWnuDQo76rYoz5@atmark-techno.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AM6PR04MB60536EF0DEEE6EB64CF29390E27D9@AM6PR04MB6053.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>

Alice Guo (OSS) wrote on Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 02:41:23AM +0000:
> Thanks for reporting this issue, I'll check and add a fix to handle defer probe.

I haven't seen any follow up on this, have you had a chance to take a
look?
If this won't make it for 5.12 (in a couple of week probably?) would it
make sense to revert 7d981405d0fd ("soc: imx8m: change to use platform
driver") for now?



While looking at the code earlier I also have an unrelated, late-review
on the patch itself:

> +static u32 __init imx8mq_soc_revision(struct device *dev)
> [...]
>  @@ -191,8 +223,16 @@ static int __init imx8_soc_init(void)
>         data = id->data;
>         if (data) {
>                 soc_dev_attr->soc_id = data->name;
> -               if (data->soc_revision)
> -                       soc_rev = data->soc_revision();
> +               if (data->soc_revision) {
> +                       if (pdev) {
> +                               soc_rev = data->soc_revision(&pdev->dev);
> +                               ret = soc_rev;
> +                               if (ret < 0)

I appreciate current soc_revision are "small enough" (looking at
include/soc/imx/revision.h we're talking < 256) so this actually works,
but would it make sense to either make soc_rev signed, or to have
soc_revision() return a s64, or have the revision filled in another *u32
argument to make sure the error is an error and not just a large rev?

This is most definitely fine for now but that kind of code patterns can
lead to weird errors down the road.

Thanks,
-- 
Dominique

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dominique MARTINET <dominique.martinet@atmark-techno.com>
To: "Alice Guo (OSS)" <alice.guo@oss.nxp.com>
Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
	"robh+dt@kernel.org" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>, dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	 "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [EXT] regression due to soc_device_match not handling defer (Was: [PATCH v4 4/4] soc: imx8m: change to use platform driver)
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 10:27:58 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YHeWnuDQo76rYoz5@atmark-techno.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AM6PR04MB60536EF0DEEE6EB64CF29390E27D9@AM6PR04MB6053.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>

Alice Guo (OSS) wrote on Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 02:41:23AM +0000:
> Thanks for reporting this issue, I'll check and add a fix to handle defer probe.

I haven't seen any follow up on this, have you had a chance to take a
look?
If this won't make it for 5.12 (in a couple of week probably?) would it
make sense to revert 7d981405d0fd ("soc: imx8m: change to use platform
driver") for now?



While looking at the code earlier I also have an unrelated, late-review
on the patch itself:

> +static u32 __init imx8mq_soc_revision(struct device *dev)
> [...]
>  @@ -191,8 +223,16 @@ static int __init imx8_soc_init(void)
>         data = id->data;
>         if (data) {
>                 soc_dev_attr->soc_id = data->name;
> -               if (data->soc_revision)
> -                       soc_rev = data->soc_revision();
> +               if (data->soc_revision) {
> +                       if (pdev) {
> +                               soc_rev = data->soc_revision(&pdev->dev);
> +                               ret = soc_rev;
> +                               if (ret < 0)

I appreciate current soc_revision are "small enough" (looking at
include/soc/imx/revision.h we're talking < 256) so this actually works,
but would it make sense to either make soc_rev signed, or to have
soc_revision() return a s64, or have the revision filled in another *u32
argument to make sure the error is an error and not just a large rev?

This is most definitely fine for now but that kind of code patterns can
lead to weird errors down the road.

Thanks,
-- 
Dominique

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2021-04-15  1:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-20 10:11 [PATCH v4 1/4] dt-bindings: soc: imx8m: add DT Binding doc for soc unique ID Alice Guo
2020-11-20 10:11 ` Alice Guo
2020-11-20 10:11 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] arm64: dts: imx8m: add SoC ID compatible Alice Guo
2020-11-20 10:11   ` Alice Guo
2020-11-20 10:11 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] arm64: dts: imx8m: add NVMEM provider and consumer to read soc unique ID Alice Guo
2020-11-20 10:11   ` Alice Guo
2020-11-20 10:53   ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2020-11-20 10:53     ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2020-11-20 10:11 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] soc: imx8m: change to use platform driver Alice Guo
2020-11-20 10:11   ` Alice Guo
2020-11-20 10:46   ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2020-11-20 10:46     ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2021-03-29  9:08   ` regression due to soc_device_match not handling defer (Was: [PATCH v4 4/4] soc: imx8m: change to use platform driver) Dominique MARTINET
2021-03-29  9:08     ` Dominique MARTINET
2021-03-30  2:41     ` [EXT] " Alice Guo (OSS)
2021-03-30  2:41       ` Alice Guo (OSS)
2021-04-15  1:27       ` Dominique MARTINET [this message]
2021-04-15  1:27         ` Dominique MARTINET
2021-04-15  1:33         ` Peng Fan
2021-04-15  1:33           ` Peng Fan
2021-06-24 10:36           ` Lucas Stach
2021-06-24 10:36             ` Lucas Stach
2021-06-29  2:39             ` Peng Fan (OSS)
2021-06-29  2:39               ` Peng Fan (OSS)
2020-11-20 10:50 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] dt-bindings: soc: imx8m: add DT Binding doc for soc unique ID Krzysztof Kozlowski
2020-11-20 10:50   ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2020-11-23  4:45   ` [EXT] " Alice Guo
2020-11-23  4:45     ` Alice Guo
2020-11-23  9:04     ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2020-11-23  9:04       ` Krzysztof Kozlowski

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YHeWnuDQo76rYoz5@atmark-techno.com \
    --to=dominique.martinet@atmark-techno.com \
    --cc=alice.guo@oss.nxp.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=krzk@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-imx@nxp.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peng.fan@nxp.com \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=shawnguo@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.