From: "Luis R. Rodriguez"
While testing asynchronous PCI probe on this driver I noticed it failed
because the driver checks if any of the PCI devices have been bound to
the driver after registering it, which obviously does not work if
probing is asynchronous.
While there are patches and discussi
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 12:19:27PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 09:01:46AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > I think that would be the goal, yes, but I think we'd need some "trial"
> > period before we can do that: I need to look into at least serial and
> > regulat
Hello,
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 09:01:46AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> I think that would be the goal, yes, but I think we'd need some "trial"
> period before we can do that: I need to look into at least serial and
> regulators to make it work (not even considering any userspace). We are
> defi
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:41:41AM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Dmitry.
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 05:26:19PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Why would they get decoupled? For example, if we are talking about input
> > devices, they can be connected to platform bus or one of i2c buses or
>
Hello, Dmitry.
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 05:26:19PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Why would they get decoupled? For example, if we are talking about input
> devices, they can be connected to platform bus or one of i2c buses or
> HID (via USB). If we want to ensure ordering we'd have to synchronize
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 07:24:01PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Dmitry.
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 03:15:30PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > So let's say that we we have 2 devices D1 and D2 which have
> > children C1 and C2 with leaves L1 and L2:
> >
> > Device Probe time
> > D1 5
>
Hello, Dmitry.
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 03:15:30PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> So let's say that we we have 2 devices D1 and D2 which have
> children C1 and C2 with leaves L1 and L2:
>
> DeviceProbe time
> D15
> D21
> C12
> C24
> L11
> L21
>
> If we run fully a
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 05:50:28PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Dmitry.
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 02:41:26PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > You are over-stating the boot order guarantees that storage provides.
> > Yes, you can scan devices and partitions simultaneously on the same
> > con
Hello, Dmitry.
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 02:41:26PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> You are over-stating the boot order guarantees that storage provides.
> Yes, you can scan devices and partitions simultaneously on the same
> controller, but it will break if controllers are registered in different
>
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 05:02:26PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 01:26:05PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Tejun, I lost you here. Certainly you are not arguing for going through
> > the drivers one by one and making their module init code to engage
> > async_sche
Hello,
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 01:26:05PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Tejun, I lost you here. Certainly you are not arguing for going through
> the drivers one by one and making their module init code to engage
> async_schedule to continue the device creation in link order (well,
> sorta, sinc
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 03:51:41PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:36:22PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Because they are not inherently problematic. I mean from the kernel POV
> > they work fine, the question is if your userspace can deal with them or
> > not.
Hello,
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:36:22PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Because they are not inherently problematic. I mean from the kernel POV
> they work fine, the question is if your userspace can deal with them or
> not. For example ChromeOS userspace is fine.
async already provides mechani
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 02:45:50PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:37:31AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > I do not believe that we will be able to activate asynchronous probing
> > by default in the next 2, 3, 4 merge windows: distributions will have to
> > try and use it an
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:37:31AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> I do not believe that we will be able to activate asynchronous probing
> by default in the next 2, 3, 4 merge windows: distributions will have to
> try and use it and see if they are ready for it. However there are
Async provides s
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 02:27:42PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Dmitry.
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:23:18AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > Is this even useful for most drivers?
> >
> > Define useful. In my tests I was able to shave 2-3 seconds (out of 8-10)
> > of boot time for the bo
Hello, Dmitry.
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:23:18AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Is this even useful for most drivers?
>
> Define useful. In my tests I was able to shave 2-3 seconds (out of 8-10)
> of boot time for the board I was trying it on. Useful for our use case,
> not so useful for othe
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 02:16:52PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:45:44AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Without the debug options how can we do that? I will definitely not be
> > able to go through all the in-tree drivers myself and see if they can be
> > async
Hello,
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:45:44AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Without the debug options how can we do that? I will definitely not be
> able to go through all the in-tree drivers myself and see if they can be
> asynchronously probed or not. The most I can do is to try enabling the
> opt
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:45:44AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:56:18PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 03:33:15PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > From: Luis R. Rodriguez
> > >
> > > While testing asynchronous PCI probe on this driver I notice
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 12:56:18PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 03:33:15PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > From: Luis R. Rodriguez
> >
> > While testing asynchronous PCI probe on this driver I noticed it failed
> > so enforce just synchronouse probe for now. Asynchronous p
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 03:33:15PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> From: Luis R. Rodriguez
>
> While testing asynchronous PCI probe on this driver I noticed it failed
> so enforce just synchronouse probe for now. Asynchronous probe is not
> used by default and requires userepace intervention. P
From: Luis R. Rodriguez
While testing asynchronous PCI probe on this driver I noticed it failed
so enforce just synchronouse probe for now. Asynchronous probe is not
used by default and requires userepace intervention. Patches for its
support will be merged later.
The reason async probe fails
23 matches
Mail list logo
