[PATCH RFC 26/46] drivers/base: provide an infrastructure for componentised subsystems

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Friday, January 03, 2014 12:18:13 PM Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 12:58:16PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Friday, January 03, 2014 11:00:30 AM Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 07:10:55PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 09:27:58PM +0000, Russell King wrote:
> > > > > Subsystems such as ALSA, DRM and others require a single card-level
> > > > > device structure to represent a subsystem.  However, firmware tends to
> > > > > describe the individual devices and the connections between them.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Therefore, we need a way to gather up the individual component devices
> > > > > together, and indicate when we have all the component devices.
> > > > > 
> > > > > We do this in DT by providing a "superdevice" node which specifies
> > > > > the components, eg:
> > > > > 
> > > > > 	imx-drm {
> > > > > 		compatible = "fsl,drm";
> > > > > 		crtcs = <&ipu1>;
> > > > > 		connectors = <&hdmi>;
> > > > > 	};
> > > > > 
> > > > > The superdevice is declared into the component support, along with the
> > > > > subcomponents.  The superdevice receives callbacks to locate the
> > > > > subcomponents, and identify when all components are present.  At this
> > > > > point, we bind the superdevice, which causes the appropriate subsystem
> > > > > to be initialised in the conventional way.
> > > > > 
> > > > > When any of the components or superdevice are removed from the system,
> > > > > we unbind the superdevice, thereby taking the subsystem down.
> > > > 
> > > > This sounds a lot like the "containers" code that Rafael just submitted
> > > > and I acked for 3.14.  Look at the lkml post:
> > > > 	Subject: [PATCH 2/2] ACPI / hotplug / driver core: Handle containers in a special way
> > > > 	Message-ID: <1991202.gilW172FBV at vostro.rjw.lan>
> > > > 
> > > > And see if that could possibly be used instead?
> > > 
> > > That's really disappointing bcause I've put a hell of a lot of work into
> > > this over the last few months, and if that's true it's all just been a
> > > total waste of my time.  Okay, lesson learned - don't spend any time
> > > trying to fix other people's problems after discussing them at
> > > kernel-summit.
> > 
> > Well, I didn't know that you were doing this work and my patch is to address
> > a specific problem that people are seeing in testing.  Also, the generic
> > containers part in it is very simple and it might be possible to integrate it
> > with your code, this way or another.  In fact, the only only thing I need from
> > containers at the moment is the online/offline functionality.
> 
> We had a session at kernel summit chaired by David Airlie to discuss
> various issues associated with DRM which included the problems of
> componentised devices registering into card-based subsystems.  There
> were quite a number of attendees to that session.

Yeah, I was there too.

> It is in that session that I said I would work on this, specifically
> with the aim of getting imx-drm out of drivers/staging.

OK, but that's not directly related to what I did with containers.

> > > In any case, the above message ID doesn't give me access to this containers
> > > code to look at to even evaluate whether it can be used for this - it just
> > > gives two patches for ACPI specific patches but not the core stuff.
> > > 
> > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-acpi/msg48101.html
> > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-acpi/msg48102.html
> > > 
> > > Please provide a better reference to the code you're referring to.
> > 
> > You can use the linux-next branch of the linux-pm.git tree at the moment or I
> > can set up a separate branch for that if that helps.  The two patches above
> > depend on some earlier material I've gueued up for 3.14, but it's mostly
> > ACPI hotplug code.
> 
> I'm not sure what I'm looking for.  I've tried looking at the results of
> searching your linux-next branch for "container" but I don't see
> anything implementing similar functionality to the patch I've sent.
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/log/?h=linux-next&qt=grep&q=container

I've just set up the acpi-hotplug branch in linux-pm.git (because I often
rebase the linux-next one).

The only commit in that branch you need to look at is this one:

http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/commit/?h=acpi-hotplug&id=caa73ea158de9419f08e456f2716c71d1f06012a

but quite frankly I'm not sure how it is related to your work. :-)

Thanks,
Rafael