All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
To: Ralf Ramsauer <ralf@ramses-pyramidenbau.de>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	linux-spi <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
	Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
	Linux I2C <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: mark device nodes only in case of successful instantiation
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 10:49:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdUMvjZvwBMUrWTk+obbUYsfRJxPTmdnv7Fz6uzkQ8nbbQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161014193113.29275-1-ralf@ramses-pyramidenbau.de>

Hi Ralf,

(Cc i2c)

On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Ralf Ramsauer
<ralf@ramses-pyramidenbau.de> wrote:
> Instantiated SPI device nodes are marked with OF_POPULATE. This was
> introduced in bd6c164. On unloading, loaded device nodes will of course
> be unmarked. The problem are nodes the fail during initialisation: If a
> node failed during registration, it won't be unloaded and hence never be
> unmarked again.
>
> So if a SPI driver module is unloaded and reloaded, it will skip nodes
> that failed before.
>
> Skip device nodes that are already populated and mark them only in case
> of success.
>
> Fixes: bd6c164 ("spi: Mark instantiated device nodes with OF_POPULATE")
> Signed-off-by: Ralf Ramsauer <ralf@ramses-pyramidenbau.de>
> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
> ---
> Hi,
>
> imagine the following situation: you loaded a spi driver as module, but
> it fails to instantiate, because of some reasons (e.g. some resources,
> like gpios, might be in use in userspace).
>
> When reloading the driver, _all_ nodes, including previously failed
> ones, should be probed again. This is not the case at the moment.
> Current behaviour only re-registers nodes that were previously
> successfully loaded.
>
> This small patches fixes this behaviour. I stumbled over this while
> working on a spi driver.

Thanks for your patch!

>  drivers/spi/spi.c | 7 +++++--
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi.c b/drivers/spi/spi.c
> index 200ca22..f96a04e 100644
> --- a/drivers/spi/spi.c
> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi.c
> @@ -1604,12 +1604,15 @@ static void of_register_spi_devices(struct spi_master *master)
>                 return;
>
>         for_each_available_child_of_node(master->dev.of_node, nc) {
> -               if (of_node_test_and_set_flag(nc, OF_POPULATED))
> +               if (of_node_check_flag(nc, OF_POPULATED))
>                         continue;
>                 spi = of_register_spi_device(master, nc);
> -               if (IS_ERR(spi))
> +               if (IS_ERR(spi)) {
>                         dev_warn(&master->dev, "Failed to create SPI device for %s\n",
>                                 nc->full_name);
> +                       continue;
> +               }
> +               of_node_set_flag(nc, OF_POPULATED);

I think it's safer to keep the atomic test-and-set, but clear the flag on
failure, cfr. of_platform_device_create_pdata() and of_amba_device_create().

Shouldn't of_spi_notify() be fixed, too?

The same issue exists for i2c in of_i2c_register_devices() and of_i2c_notify(),
which is what I had used as an example.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-16  8:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-14 19:31 [PATCH] spi: mark device nodes only in case of successful instantiation Ralf Ramsauer
2016-10-14 19:31 ` Ralf Ramsauer
2016-10-16  8:49 ` Geert Uytterhoeven [this message]
2016-10-16  9:32   ` Wolfram Sang
2016-10-16  9:55   ` Ralf Ramsauer
2016-10-16  9:55     ` Ralf Ramsauer
2016-10-17 19:20     ` Pantelis Antoniou
2016-10-17 19:20       ` Pantelis Antoniou
2016-10-17 21:07       ` Wolfram Sang
2016-10-17 21:09         ` Wolfram Sang
2016-10-17 21:09           ` Wolfram Sang

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=CAMuHMdUMvjZvwBMUrWTk+obbUYsfRJxPTmdnv7Fz6uzkQ8nbbQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=geert+renesas@glider.be \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-spi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ralf@ramses-pyramidenbau.de \
    --cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
    /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.