From: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Cc: swboyd@chromium.org, Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@analog.com>,
Daniel Campello <campello@chromium.org>,
Enrico Granata <egranata@chromium.org>,
Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@gmx.de>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] iio: sx9310: Prefer async probe
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 17:01:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200828170052.1.Id02b2f451b3eed71ddd580f4b8b44b3e33e84970@changeid> (raw)
On one board I found that:
probe of 5-0028 returned 1 after 259547 usecs
There's no reason to block probe of all other devices on our probe.
Turn on async probe.
Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
---
NOTE: I haven't done any analysis of the driver to see _why_ it's so
slow, only that I have measured it to be slow. Someone could
certainly take the time to profile / optimize it, but in any case it
still won't hurt to be async.
This is a very safe flag to turn on since:
1. It's not like our probe order was defined by anything anyway. When
we probe is at the whim of when our i2c controller probes and that can
be any time.
2. If some other driver needs us then they have to handle the fact
that we might not have probed yet anyway.
3. There may be other drivers probing at the same time as us anyway
because _they_ used async probe.
While I won't say that it's impossible to tickle a bug by turning on
async probe, I would assert that in almost all cases the bug was
already there and needed to be fixed anyway.
ALSO NOTE: measurement / testing was done on the downstream Chrome OS
5.4 tree. I confirmed compiling on mainline.
drivers/iio/proximity/sx9310.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/drivers/iio/proximity/sx9310.c b/drivers/iio/proximity/sx9310.c
index dc2e11b43431..444cafc53408 100644
--- a/drivers/iio/proximity/sx9310.c
+++ b/drivers/iio/proximity/sx9310.c
@@ -1054,6 +1054,7 @@ static struct i2c_driver sx9310_driver = {
.acpi_match_table = ACPI_PTR(sx9310_acpi_match),
.of_match_table = of_match_ptr(sx9310_of_match),
.pm = &sx9310_pm_ops,
+ .probe_type = PROBE_PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS,
},
.probe = sx9310_probe,
.id_table = sx9310_id,
--
2.28.0.402.g5ffc5be6b7-goog
next reply other threads:[~2020-08-29 0:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-29 0:01 Douglas Anderson [this message]
2020-08-29 15:12 ` [PATCH] iio: sx9310: Prefer async probe Jonathan Cameron
2020-08-29 16:56 ` Doug Anderson
2020-08-29 17:17 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-08-31 18:59 ` Doug Anderson
2020-09-01 7:03 ` Stephen Boyd
2020-09-01 13:45 ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-09-01 15:23 ` Doug Anderson
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=20200828170052.1.Id02b2f451b3eed71ddd580f4b8b44b3e33e84970@changeid \
--to=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=alexandru.ardelean@analog.com \
--cc=campello@chromium.org \
--cc=egranata@chromium.org \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=knaack.h@gmx.de \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
--cc=swboyd@chromium.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).