From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D16E1C433E0 for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 13:15:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0A162084C for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 13:15:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727885AbgEZNP2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 May 2020 09:15:28 -0400 Received: from mga12.intel.com ([192.55.52.136]:38876 "EHLO mga12.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727034AbgEZNP2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 May 2020 09:15:28 -0400 IronPort-SDR: EWgO04nPFkiriWKxrV5yP0RDL/yIzxNhq5o7dNPAIRzVl4tZe3ApOS66TIlCHARSjQoKOYjj/O UtOl17E35WCA== X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 May 2020 06:15:28 -0700 IronPort-SDR: lNh3jkfJZKreBgpVTFVGv5kBERjmqXzXzjazaSx6FXzSnFbSVUi8RxVd1gjxP8nqVL0e/G8W6Y Vnab/QspxK0w== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.73,437,1583222400"; d="scan'208";a="266447104" Received: from rbalaz-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.251.20.147]) ([10.251.20.147]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 26 May 2020 06:15:27 -0700 Subject: Re: [net-next v4 10/12] ASoC: SOF: Introduce descriptors for SOF client To: Greg KH Cc: Jason Gunthorpe , Ranjani Sridharan , Jeff Kirsher , davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, nhorman@redhat.com, sassmann@redhat.com, Fred Oh , Takashi Iwai References: <20200520070227.3392100-1-jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com> <20200520070227.3392100-11-jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com> <20200520125437.GH31189@ziepe.ca> <08fa562783e8a47f857d7f96859ab3617c47e81c.camel@linux.intel.com> <20200521233437.GF17583@ziepe.ca> <7abfbda8-2b4b-5301-6a86-1696d4898525@linux.intel.com> <20200523062351.GD3156699@kroah.com> <57185aae-e1c9-4380-7801-234a13deebae@linux.intel.com> <20200524063519.GB1369260@kroah.com> From: Pierre-Louis Bossart Message-ID: Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 08:15:26 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200524063519.GB1369260@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-rdma-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 5/24/20 1:35 AM, Greg KH wrote: > On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 02:41:51PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: >> >> >> On 5/23/20 1:23 AM, Greg KH wrote: >>> On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 09:29:57AM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: >>>> This is not an hypothetical case, we've had this recurring problem when a >>>> PCI device creates an audio card represented as a platform device. When the >>>> card registration fails, typically due to configuration issues, the PCI >>>> probe still completes. >>> >>> Then fix that problem there. The audio card should not be being created >>> as a platform device, as that is not what it is. And even if it was, >>> the probe should not complete, it should clean up after itself and error >>> out. >> >> Did you mean 'the PCI probe should not complete and error out'? > > Yes. > >> If yes, that's yet another problem... During the PCI probe, we start a >> workqueue and return success to avoid blocking everything. > > That's crazy. > >> And only 'later' do we actually create the card. So that's two levels >> of probe that cannot report a failure. I didn't come up with this >> design, IIRC this is due to audio-DRM dependencies and it's been used >> for 10+ years. > > Then if the probe function fails, it needs to unwind everything itself > and unregister the device with the PCI subsystem so that things work > properly. If it does not do that today, that's a bug. > > What kind of crazy dependencies cause this type of "requirement"? I think it is related to the request_module("i915") in snd_hdac_i915_init(), and possibly other firmware download. Adding Takashi for more details.