From: Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> To: Zev Weiss <zev@bewilderbeest.net>, openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Jeremy Kerr <jk@codeconstruct.com.au> Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] of: add support for 'dynamic' DT property Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2021 09:46:17 -0500 [thread overview] Message-ID: <c6001d43-b47c-e232-38de-9227b8d3581a@gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <05e4c31e-db7e-e8f2-fa37-3cdcdf902e19@gmail.com> Hi Rob, On 10/11/21 8:58 AM, Frank Rowand wrote: > Hi Matt, Greg, That was meant to be Rob, not Matt. -Frank > > On 10/8/21 1:51 PM, Frank Rowand wrote: >> On 10/6/21 7:09 PM, Zev Weiss wrote: >>> Nodes marked with this (boolean) property will have a writable status >>> sysfs file, which can be used to toggle them between "okay" and >>> "reserved", effectively hot-plugging them. Note that this will only >>> be effective for devices on busses that register for OF reconfig >>> notifications (currently spi, i2c, and platform), and only if >>> CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC is enabled. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Zev Weiss <zev@bewilderbeest.net> >>> --- >>> drivers/of/kobj.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 69 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/of/kobj.c b/drivers/of/kobj.c >>> index 378cb421aae1..141ae23f3130 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/of/kobj.c >>> +++ b/drivers/of/kobj.c >>> @@ -36,6 +36,69 @@ static ssize_t of_node_property_read(struct file *filp, struct kobject *kobj, >>> return memory_read_from_buffer(buf, count, &offset, pp->value, pp->length); >>> } >>> >>> +static ssize_t of_node_status_write(struct file *filp, struct kobject *kobj, >>> + struct bin_attribute *bin_attr, char *buf, >>> + loff_t offset, size_t count) >>> +{ >>> + int rc; >>> + char *newstatus; >>> + struct property **deadprev; >>> + struct property *newprop = NULL; >>> + struct property *oldprop = container_of(bin_attr, struct property, attr); >>> + struct device_node *np = container_of(kobj, struct device_node, kobj); >>> + >>> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(strcmp(oldprop->name, "status"))) >>> + return -EIO; >>> + >>> + if (offset) >>> + return -EINVAL; >>> + >>> + if (sysfs_buf_streq(buf, count, "okay") || sysfs_buf_streq(buf, count, "ok")) >>> + newstatus = "okay"; >>> + else if (sysfs_buf_streq(buf, count, "reserved")) >>> + newstatus = "reserved"; >>> + else if (sysfs_buf_streq(buf, count, "disabled")) >>> + newstatus = "disabled"; >>> + else >>> + return -EINVAL; >>> + >>> + if (!strcmp(newstatus, oldprop->value)) >>> + return count; >>> + >> >> If the general approach of this patch set is the correct way to provide the desired >> functionality (I'm still pondering that), then a version of the following code > > After pondering, this approach does not appear workable to me. > > If we allow one property to be writable via sysfs we open the door for any property to > be writable from sysfs. This will likely lead to a desire to modify more than one > related property as a single transaction (so that the changes occur as a single > transaction, under a single lock event, with a single notification after all > of the properties are modified). This is not meant to be an exhaustive list of > the issues that have already been thought through in the context of overlays > (though not all of the issues have been addressed with overlays, at least many > of them, such as one transaction to apply an entire overlay, have been.) > > I don't want to make this a long missive, but will at least note the next > issue that popped up in my pondering, which is complications from modifying > the same items in a devicetree via different methods, such as both writing > to sysfs and applying/removing overlays. If the problems in the previous > paragraph are not sufficient to prevent the sysfs approach then I can > elaborate further on these additional issues. > > So another approach is needed. I have no yet thought this through, but I > have an alternative. First, change the new property name from "dynamic" > to something more descriptive like "ownership_shifts_between_os_and_others" > (yes, my suggestions is way too verbose and needs to be word smithed, but > the point is to clearly state the underlying action that occurs), then > define the result of this variable to be driver specific, where the > driver is required upon probe to instantiate the device in a manner > that does not impact the other user(s) of the underlying hardware > and to use a driver specific method to transfer control of the > hardware between the os and the other user(s). I propose the method > would be via a device specific file (or set of files) in sysfs (Greg's > input invited on the use of sysfs in this manner - if I recall correctly > this is the current preferred mechanism). > > -Frank > > >> probably belongs in drivers/of/dynamic.c so that it is easier to maintain and keep >> consistent with other dynamic devicetree updates. If you look at the code there >> that touches deadprops (eg __of_changeset_entry_apply()) you will notice that the >> locking issues are more extensive than what is implemented here. >> >> I'm still thinking about how this interacts with other forms of dynamic devicetree >> changes (eg drivers/of/dynamic.c and also overlays). >> >>> + /* >>> + * of_update_property_self() doesn't free replaced properties, so >>> + * rifle through deadprops first to see if there's an equivalent old >>> + * status property we can reuse instead of allocating a new one. >>> + */ >>> + mutex_lock(&of_mutex); >>> + for (deadprev = &np->deadprops; *deadprev; deadprev = &(*deadprev)->next) { >>> + struct property *deadprop = *deadprev; >>> + if (!strcmp(deadprop->name, "status") && >>> + deadprop->length == strlen(newstatus) + 1 && >>> + !strcmp(deadprop->value, newstatus)) { >>> + *deadprev = deadprop->next; >>> + deadprop->next = NULL; >>> + newprop = deadprop; >>> + break; >>> + } >>> + } >>> + mutex_unlock(&of_mutex); >>> + >>> + if (!newprop) { >>> + newprop = kzalloc(sizeof(*newprop), GFP_KERNEL); >>> + if (!newprop) >>> + return -ENOMEM; >>> + >>> + newprop->name = oldprop->name; >>> + newprop->value = newstatus; >>> + newprop->length = strlen(newstatus) + 1; >>> + } >>> + >>> + rc = of_update_property_self(np, newprop, true); >> >> -Frank >> >>> + >>> + return rc ? rc : count; >>> +} >>> + >>> /* always return newly allocated name, caller must free after use */ >>> static const char *safe_name(struct kobject *kobj, const char *orig_name) >>> { >>> @@ -79,6 +142,12 @@ int __of_add_property_sysfs(struct device_node *np, struct property *pp) >>> pp->attr.size = secure ? 0 : pp->length; >>> pp->attr.read = of_node_property_read; >>> >>> + if (!strcmp(pp->name, "status") && of_property_read_bool(np, "dynamic")) { >>> + pp->attr.attr.mode |= 0200; >>> + pp->attr.write = of_node_status_write; >>> + pp->attr.growable = true; >>> + } >>> + >>> rc = sysfs_create_bin_file(&np->kobj, &pp->attr); >>> WARN(rc, "error adding attribute %s to node %pOF\n", pp->name, np); >>> return rc; >>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-11 14:47 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-10-07 0:09 [PATCH 0/9] Dynamic DT device nodes Zev Weiss 2021-10-07 0:09 ` [PATCH 1/9] sysfs: add sysfs_remove_bin_file_self() function Zev Weiss 2021-10-07 5:23 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2021-10-07 5:58 ` Zev Weiss 2021-10-07 6:12 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2021-10-07 6:55 ` Zev Weiss 2021-10-07 0:09 ` [PATCH 2/9] sysfs: add growable flag to struct bin_attribute Zev Weiss 2021-10-07 0:09 ` [PATCH 3/9] lib/string: add sysfs_buf_streq() Zev Weiss 2021-10-07 0:09 ` [PATCH 4/9] of: add self parameter to __of_sysfs_remove_bin_file() Zev Weiss 2021-10-07 5:25 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2021-10-07 0:09 ` [PATCH 5/9] of: add self parameter to of_update_property() Zev Weiss 2021-10-07 5:26 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2021-10-07 0:09 ` [PATCH 6/9] of: add support for 'dynamic' DT property Zev Weiss 2021-10-08 18:51 ` Frank Rowand 2021-10-08 19:19 ` Frank Rowand 2021-10-11 13:58 ` Frank Rowand 2021-10-11 14:46 ` Frank Rowand [this message] 2021-10-11 17:35 ` Zev Weiss 2021-10-07 0:09 ` [PATCH 7/9] of: make OF_DYNAMIC selectable independently of OF_UNITTEST Zev Weiss 2021-10-08 19:01 ` Frank Rowand 2021-10-07 0:09 ` [PATCH 8/9] dt-bindings: document new 'dynamic' common property Zev Weiss 2021-10-07 5:26 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2021-10-07 6:03 ` Zev Weiss 2021-10-07 0:09 ` [PATCH 9/9] ARM: dts: aspeed: Add e3c246d4i BIOS flash device Zev Weiss 2021-10-07 2:46 ` [PATCH 0/9] Dynamic DT device nodes Florian Fainelli 2021-10-07 5:44 ` Zev Weiss 2021-10-07 7:04 ` Andy Shevchenko 2021-10-07 9:05 ` Zev Weiss 2021-10-07 10:31 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2021-10-07 15:41 ` Zev Weiss 2021-10-07 20:03 ` Rob Herring 2021-10-08 5:41 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman 2021-10-08 19:43 ` Frank Rowand
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=c6001d43-b47c-e232-38de-9227b8d3581a@gmail.com \ --to=frowand.list@gmail.com \ --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \ --cc=jk@codeconstruct.com.au \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org \ --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \ --cc=zev@bewilderbeest.net \ --subject='Re: [PATCH 6/9] of: add support for '\''dynamic'\'' DT property' \ /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
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).