All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: ksummit <ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
	ksummit@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [TECH TOPIC] Driver probe fails and register succeeds
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2022 02:30:38 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YrT3niddXMfuTWnT@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a3de118e-1ef8-ac79-cf0c-e5e55a1238c8@linuxfoundation.org>

Hi Shuah,

On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 05:28:09PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 6/23/22 5:13 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 05:05:30PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> >> I have been debugging a driver probe failure and noticed that driver gets
> >> registered even when driver probe fails. This is not a new behavior. The
> >> code in question is the same since 2005.
> >>
> >> dmesg will say that a driver probe failed with error code and then the very
> >> next message from interface core that says driver is registered successfully.
> >> It will create sysfs interfaces.
> >>
> >> The probe failure is propagated from the drive probe routine all the way up to
> >> __driver_attach(). __driver_attach() ignores the error and and returns success.
> >>
> >>           __device_driver_lock(dev, dev->parent);
> >>           driver_probe_device(drv, dev);
> >>           __device_driver_unlock(dev, dev->parent);
> >>
> >>           return 0;
> >>
> >> Interface driver register goes on to create sysfs entries as if driver probe
> >> worked. It handles errors from driver_register() and unwinds the register
> >> properly, however in this case it doesn't know about the failure.
> >>
> >> At this point the driver is defunct with sysfs interfaces. User has to run
> >> rmmod to get rid of the defunct driver.
> >>
> >> Simply returning the error from __driver_attach() didn't work as expected.
> >> I figured it would fail since not all interface drivers can handle errors
> >> from driver probe routines.
> >>
> >> I propose that we discuss the scenario to find possible solutions to avoid
> >> defunct drivers.
> > 
> > This seems to be the expected behaviour to me. The probe failure doesn't
> > necessarily indicate that the driver is at fault, it means that
> > something went wrong when associating a particular device with the
> > driver. It could be that the device is faulty for instance, and that
> > shouldn't prevent the driver from being registered, especially if
> > multiple instances of the device can be present in the system, as that
> > would then prevent any of those instances from working due to one faulty
> > device.
> 
> Agreed. This behavior works well in the cases of hardware/device failures
> that cause probe failure. The case I am seeing is a driver bug that causes
> probe failure.

Is there a way for the kernel to determine that the probe failure was
caused by a buggy driver and not a faulty device ?

> > What other behaviour would you expect ?
> 
> I am looking to see if we can propagate the error to the interface driver to
> handle instead of leaving the defunct driver. This isn't an easy problem to
> solve though. As you mentioned driver probe could fail if device is bad
> and we want the driver to handle the others.
> 
> The fact is we will end up with defunct drivers in some cases. If user notices
> the error they could go clean it up. My main concern is the sysfs interfaces
> hanging around. The desired behavior would be not leaving defunct drivers with
> associated sysfs files.

I don't think the driver is "defunct". It has been loaded successfully,
and it's fully operational, just not bound to any device.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

  reply	other threads:[~2022-06-23 23:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-06-23 23:05 [TECH TOPIC] Driver probe fails and register succeeds Shuah Khan
2022-06-23 23:13 ` Laurent Pinchart
2022-06-23 23:28   ` Shuah Khan
2022-06-23 23:30     ` Laurent Pinchart [this message]
2022-06-23 23:38       ` Shuah Khan
2022-06-23 23:57         ` Dan Williams
2022-06-24  1:00           ` Dmitry Torokhov
2022-06-24  6:33             ` Greg KH
2022-06-23 23:24 ` Guenter Roeck
2022-06-24  6:31 ` Greg KH
2022-06-24 15:55   ` Shuah Khan

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=YrT3niddXMfuTWnT@pendragon.ideasonboard.com \
    --to=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
    --cc=ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=ksummit@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.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.