[PATCH 3/4] simplefb: Change simplefb_init from module_init to fs_initcall

Hans de Goede hdegoede at redhat.com
Tue Nov 18 04:44:44 PST 2014


On 11/18/2014 12:46 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
> On 11/18/2014 12:21 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 12:01:08PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> On 11/18/2014 11:19 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 09:58:41AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>>> Hi Maxime,
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Maxime Ripard
>>>>> <maxime.ripard at free-electrons.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> -module_init(simplefb_init);
>>>>>>> +/*
>>>>>>> + * While this can be a module, if builtin it's most likely the console
>>>>>>> + * So let's leave module_exit but move module_init to an earlier place
>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>> Not really related to this patch itself, but do we want to support
>>>>>> simplefb as a module? It seems like it's going to be most of the time
>>>>>> broken.
>>>>> If it depends on clocks, it won't work as a module, as CCF will have disabled
>>>>> all unused clocks at that point.
>>>> If it does depend on anything beyond clocks it won't work at all. Clocks
>>>> are special because they get set up very early at boot time. If it turns
>>>> out that a simplefb ever needs a regulator to remain on, and that's even
>>>> quite likely to happen eventually, it's going to fail miserably, because
>>>> those regulators will typically be provided by a PMIC on an I2C bus. The
>>>> regulator won't be registered until very late into the boot process and
>>>> a regulator_get() call will almost certainly cause the simplefb driver
>>>> to defer probing.
>>> Right, this has been discussed already and the plan is to have simplefb
>>> continue its probe function and return success from it if it encounters
>>> any -eprobe_defer errors, while tracking which resources it misses.
>>> And then have a late_initcall which will claim any resources which failed
>>> with -eprobe beforehand.
>> How do you ensure that the late_initcall gets run before any of the
>> other late_initcalls that disable the resources?
>> Also my recollection is
>> that deferred probing will first be triggered the first time from a
>> late_initcall, so chances aren't very high that all resources have shown
>> up by that time.
> So I just looked up the relevant code, and your right, this means that
> the whole model of "disable unused resources once probing is done" which
> we use for e.g. clocks, is already somewhat broken since there is
> no guarantee probing is really done when the cleanup code runs.
>>>> Now deferring probing is a real showstopper for simplefb, because not
>>>> only does it make the framebuffer useless as early boot console, once
>>>> probing is attempted again the clocks that it would have needed to
>>>> acquire to keep going will already have been switched off, too.
>>> That is not true, even with the current implementation, if all necessary
>>> drivers are built in, then simplefb will come up later, but it will still
>>> come up before the late_initcall which disables the clocks.
>> Yes, in the current implementation because clocks typically are
>> registered very early and thus you don't hit the deferred probe. The
>> same is not true for other types of resources where it's actually quite
>> common to hit deferred probing (regulators is a very notorious one).
>> It doesn't matter whether a driver is built-in or not, once you hit
>> deferred probing you lose.
>>> Once we do the split probing described above (which is something which
>>> we plan to do when it becomes necessary), then simplefb will still come
>>> up early.
>> It will come up early but won't have acquired all the resources that it
>> needs, so unless you somehow manage to order late_initcalls in exactly
>> the way that you need them, the frameworks will still turn off what you
>> haven't managed to claim yet.
> If it is a resource which only shows up as a result of deferred probing,
> then it may very well not have been probed & registered yet, when the
> framework cleanup functions runs, and thus will not get turned off...
> So yes you're right that deferred probing may cause issues, but it seems
> that this is not something simplefb specific, but rather a generic problem
> with deferred-probing vs subsys cleanup functions.
> My view on this is simple, lets worry about this when we actually have
> a board which hits these issues, and then we'll see from there.

So thinking more about this, I think this is not that hard to fix.

First lets fix the generic conflict between eprobedefer and subsys cleanup
functions. This can be done by:

1) Having a linked list of subsys cleanup functions
to call in drivers/base/dd.c

2) Have subsystems register their cleanup function rather then using
late_initcall to get it called

3) Have deferred_probe_work_func iterate over the list and call the cleanup
functions once deferred_probe_active_list goes empty. It should also remove
them once called, so that they only get called the first time
deferred_probe_active_list goes empty (iow when the deferred probing of'
build-in drivers is done).

This way cleanup functions actually get run when all probing of (buildin)
drivers is done.

Then when we move simplefb to a 2 fase probe, we can simply register the
framebuffer at the first probe call, and claim any resources we get, but
return -eprobe_defer if some resources returned that themselves.

Then when simplefb_probe gets re-called, it can first check if it did not
already register a fb, and if it did, it can use that and see which
resources are missing, and only try to claim those. If some resources
still return probe_defer, return eprobe_defer again, otherwise success.

This way simplefb_probe will get called as long as resources are missing
and other drivers are successfully completing deferred probes (if no
driver successfully completes a deferred probe, deferred_probe_active_list
will go empty).

And then when the subsys cleanup functions run, simplefb will have been
able to claim any resources registered by buildin drivers.



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list