From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@arm.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
boot-architecture@lists.linaro.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] driver core: make deferring probe forever optional
Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 15:08:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180501220803.GB31900@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180501213114.20183-1-robh@kernel.org>
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 04:31:14PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> Deferred probe will currently wait forever on dependent devices to probe,
> but sometimes a driver will never exist. It's also not always critical for
> a driver to exist. Platforms can rely on default configuration from the
> bootloader or reset defaults for things such as pinctrl and power domains.
> This is often the case with initial platform support until various drivers
> get enabled. There's at least 2 scenarios where deferred probe can render
> a platform broken. Both involve using a DT which has more devices and
> dependencies than the kernel supports. The 1st case is a driver may be
> disabled in the kernel config. The 2nd case is the kernel version may
> simply not have the dependent driver. This can happen if using a newer DT
> (provided by firmware perhaps) with a stable kernel version.
>
> Unfortunately, this change breaks with modules as we have no way of
> knowing when modules are done loading. One possibility is to make this
> opt in or out based on compatible strings rather than at a subsystem level.
> Ideally this information could be extracted automatically somehow. OTOH,
> maybe the lists are pretty small. There's only a handful of subsystems
> that can be optional, and then only so many drivers in those that can be
> modules (at least for pinctrl, many drivers are built-in only).
>
> Cc: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
> ---
> This patch came out of a discussion on the ARM boot-architecture
> list[1] about DT forwards and backwards compatibility issues. There are
> issues with newer DTs breaking on older, stable kernels. Some of these
> are difficult to solve, but cases of optional devices not having
> kernel support should be solvable.
>
> I tested this on a RPi3 B with the pinctrl driver forced off. With this
> change, the MMC/SD and UART drivers can function without the pinctrl
> driver.
>
> Rob
>
> [1] https://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/boot-architecture/2018-April/000466.html
>
> drivers/base/dd.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> drivers/pinctrl/devicetree.c | 2 +-
> include/linux/device.h | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/dd.c b/drivers/base/dd.c
> index c9f54089429b..5848808b9d7a 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/dd.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/dd.c
> @@ -226,6 +226,15 @@ void device_unblock_probing(void)
> driver_deferred_probe_trigger();
> }
>
> +
> +int driver_deferred_probe_optional(void)
> +{
> + if (initcalls_done)
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> + return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> +}
The name is ackward for this function, but I can't think of anything
better at the moment, sorry. However, the overall idea for this is
sane, no objection from me at all for this change.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-01 22:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-01 21:31 [RFC PATCH] driver core: make deferring probe forever optional Rob Herring
2018-05-01 22:08 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
2018-05-02 11:40 ` Robin Murphy
2018-05-02 14:48 ` Rob Herring
2018-05-02 18:49 ` Robin Murphy
2018-05-05 1:25 ` Mark Brown
2018-05-07 13:37 ` Rob Herring
2018-05-02 13:16 ` Alexander Graf
2018-05-07 18:31 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-05-07 19:55 ` Rob Herring
2018-05-07 22:34 ` Bjorn Andersson
2018-05-09 9:18 ` Mark Brown
2018-05-09 9:57 ` Alexander Graf
2018-05-09 22:34 ` Rob Herring
2018-05-09 22:30 ` Rob Herring
2018-05-09 9:44 ` Alexander Graf
2018-05-13 22:01 ` Linus Walleij
2018-05-14 7:37 ` Alexander Graf
2018-05-14 12:44 ` Michal Simek
2018-05-16 14:38 ` Linus Walleij
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=20180501220803.GB31900@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=boot-architecture@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=grant.likely@arm.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=sboyd@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).