From: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@suse.com>
To: Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@ew.tq-group.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Oliver Neukum <oneukum@suse.com>
Cc: Korneliusz Osmenda <korneliuszo@gmail.com>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] Guard pci_create_sysfs_dev_files with atomic value
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2023 15:01:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ced8713f-69de-e48a-37eb-4f844e651b6b@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3607385.usQuhbGJ8B@steina-w>
On 16.03.23 14:16, Alexander Stein wrote:
> But isn't the root bridge discovered by the driver (pci-imx6 in this case) for
> that? And the driver probe path eventually calls into the sysfs file creation.
> I compared the file creation to usb, as this is a discoverable bus as well.
> There is no special initialization regarding sysfs.
If you discover a bus system you always have the option of creating of virtual
hotplug event for the root hub or host controller.
But for PCI that is a bad design choice. USB is different.
> If, for some reason, the device enumeration for PCI bus during imx6_pcie_probe
> is delayed after pci_sysfs_init initcall, this initcall essentially does
> nothing, no devices or busses to iterate. Which means the complete pcie sysfs
On your specific system. You cannot use that as a model for all systems.
> creation is done from bridge probe path. There is no reason to iterate over
> discovered PCIe devices/busses separately.
If there is no other PCI device, the loop is a nop. But otherwise it is necessary.
>>> So technically the device is not probed from within a initcall but a
>>> kthread. It is set to be probed asynchronous in imx6_pcie_driver.
>>
>> That may be the problem, respectively that system is incomplete
>> You are registering a PCI bridge. The PCI subsystem should be
>> done setting up when you run. That is just a simple dependency.
>
> Is there such an dependency in the first place? I can't see anything, even the
> late_initcall to pci_resource_alignment_sysfs_init is a different matter.
On your hardware, yes. In the kernel, no.
That is the very point. The kernel is missing a way to represent a dependency.
Regards
Oliver
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-16 14:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-16 9:15 [PATCH v2 1/1] Guard pci_create_sysfs_dev_files with atomic value Alexander Stein
2023-03-16 9:18 ` Alexander Stein
2023-03-16 9:23 ` Oliver Neukum
2023-03-16 9:33 ` Alexander Stein
2023-03-16 11:17 ` Oliver Neukum
2023-03-16 11:58 ` Alexander Stein
2023-03-16 12:23 ` Oliver Neukum
2023-03-16 13:16 ` Alexander Stein
2023-03-16 14:01 ` Oliver Neukum [this message]
2023-03-16 15:00 ` Alexander Stein
2023-03-21 9:09 ` Oliver Neukum
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=ced8713f-69de-e48a-37eb-4f844e651b6b@suse.com \
--to=oneukum@suse.com \
--cc=alexander.stein@ew.tq-group.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=korneliuszo@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.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).