From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Torokhov Subject: Re: [RFC v2 3/6] kthread: warn on kill signal if not OOM Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 11:10:03 -0700 Message-ID: <20140905181003.GA29003@core.coreip.homeip.net> References: <1409899047-13045-1-git-send-email-mcgrof@do-not-panic.com> <20140905141241.GC10455@mtj.dyndns.org> <20140905164405.GA28964@core.coreip.homeip.net> <20140905174925.GA12991@mtj.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Wu Zhangjin , Takashi Iwai , Arjan van de Ven , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Oleg Nesterov , hare@suse.com, Andrew Morton , Tetsuo Handa , Joseph Salisbury , Benjamin Poirier , Santosh Rastapur , Kay Sievers , One Thousand Gnomes , Tim Gardner , Pierre Fersing , Nagalakshmi Nandigama , Praveen Krishnamoorthy , Sreekanth Reddy , Abhijit To: Tejun Heo Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140905174925.GA12991@mtj.dyndns.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 02:49:25AM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 09:44:05AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > Which problem are we talking about here though? It does solve the slow device > > stalling the rest if the kernel booting (non-module case) for me. > > The other one. The one with timeout. Neither cxgb4 or pata_marvell > has slow probing stalling boot problem. > > > I also reject the notion that anyone should be relying on drivers to be fully > > bound on module loading. It is not nineties anymore. We have hot pluggable > > buses, deferred probing, and even for not hot-pluggable ones the module > > providing the device itself might not be yet loaded. Any scripts that expect to > > find device 100% ready after module loading are simply broken. > > We've been treating loading + probing as a single operation when > loading drivers and the assumption has always been that the existing > devices at the time of loading finished probing by the time insmod > finishes. We now need to split loading and probing and wait for each > of them differently. The *only* thing we can do is somehow making the > issuer specify that it's gonna wait for probing separately. I'm not > sure this can even be up for discussion. We're talking about a major > userland visible behavior change. I do not agree that it is actually user-visible change: generally speaking you do not really know if device is there or not. They come and go. Like I said, consider all permutations, with hot-pluggable buses, deferred probing, etc, etc. Thanks. -- Dmitry