[PATCH 01/11] drivercore: Add driver probe deferral mechanism

Sylwester Nawrocki sylvester.nawrocki at gmail.com
Mon Mar 19 19:12:56 EDT 2012


On 03/08/2012 03:51 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> From: Grant Likely<grant.likely at secretlab.ca>
>
> Allow drivers to report at probe time that they cannot get all the resources
> required by the device, and should be retried at a later time.
>
> This should completely solve the problem of getting devices
> initialized in the right order.  Right now this is mostly handled by
> mucking about with initcall ordering which is a complete hack, and
> doesn't even remotely handle the case where device drivers are in
> modules.  This approach completely sidesteps the issues by allowing
> driver registration to occur in any order, and any driver can request
> to be retried after a few more other drivers get probed.
>
> v4: - Integrate Manjunath's addition of a separate workqueue
>      - Change -EAGAIN to -EPROBE_DEFER for drivers to trigger deferral
>      - Update comment blocks to reflect how the code really works
> v3: - Hold off workqueue scheduling until late_initcall so that the bulk
>        of driver probes are complete before we start retrying deferred devices.
>      - Tested with simple use cases.  Still needs more testing though.
>        Using it to get rid of the gpio early_initcall madness, or to replace
>        the ASoC internal probe deferral code would be ideal.
> v2: - added locking so it should no longer be utterly broken in that regard
>      - remove device from deferred list at device_del time.
>      - Still completely untested with any real use case, but has been
>        boot tested.
>
> Signed-off-by: Grant Likely<grant.likely at secretlab.ca>
> [Cc list stripped in order not to get on people's nerves]
> ---
>   drivers/base/base.h    |    1 +
>   drivers/base/core.c    |    2 +
>   drivers/base/dd.c      |  138 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>   include/linux/device.h |    5 ++
>   include/linux/errno.h  |    1 +
>   5 files changed, 146 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Is this patch going to be included in v3.4 ? I can see it's in -next,
but not sure where I could check if its really queued for v3.4.
It would be nice to have it in v3.4, I've got already one more client
of this deferred probe infrastructure.

--

Thanks,
Sylwester



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list