[PATCH v8 03/12] iommu/mediatek: Add probe_defer for smi-larb
Yong Wu
yong.wu at mediatek.com
Thu Sep 30 00:14:45 PDT 2021
On Wed, 2021-09-29 at 18:33 +0200, Dafna Hirschfeld wrote:
>
> On 29.09.21 03:37, Yong Wu wrote:
> > Prepare for adding device_link.
> >
> > The iommu consumer should use device_link to connect with the
> > smi-larb(supplier). then the smi-larb should run before the iommu
> > consumer. Here we delay the iommu driver until the smi driver is
> > ready,
> > then all the iommu consumers always are after the smi driver.
> >
> > When there is no this patch, if some consumer drivers run before
> > smi-larb, the supplier link_status is DL_DEV_NO_DRIVER(0) in the
> > device_link_add, then device_links_driver_bound will use WARN_ON
> > to complain that the link_status of supplier is not right.
> >
> > device_is_bound may be more elegant here. but it is not allowed to
> > EXPORT from https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1334670/.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yong Wu <yong.wu at mediatek.com>
> > Tested-by: Frank Wunderlich <frank-w at public-files.de> # BPI-
> > R2/MT7623
> > ---
> > drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c | 2 +-
> > drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu_v1.c | 2 +-
> > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c
> > index d837adfd1da5..d5848f78a677 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu.c
> > @@ -844,7 +844,7 @@ static int mtk_iommu_probe(struct
> > platform_device *pdev)
> > id = i;
> >
> > plarbdev = of_find_device_by_node(larbnode);
> > - if (!plarbdev) {
> > + if (!plarbdev || !plarbdev->dev.driver) {
> > of_node_put(larbnode);
> > return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>
> if plarbdev is null doesn't that mean that the device does not exist?
This is probe function, Is it possible the platform device is not ready
at this time?
I checked the platform device should be created at:
of_platform_default_populate_init: arch_initcall_sync
->of_platform_populate
->of_platform_device_create_pdata
Not sure if this may be delayed for some device. If not, it should be
ENODEV here.
> so we should return -ENODEV in that case?
>
> thanks,
> Dafna
>
> > }
> > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu_v1.c
> > b/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu_v1.c
> > index 1467ba1e4417..4d7809432239 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu_v1.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iommu/mtk_iommu_v1.c
> > @@ -602,7 +602,7 @@ static int mtk_iommu_probe(struct
> > platform_device *pdev)
> > }
> >
> > plarbdev = of_find_device_by_node(larbnode);
> > - if (!plarbdev) {
> > + if (!plarbdev || !plarbdev->dev.driver) {
> > of_node_put(larbnode);
> > return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> > }
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-mediatek mailing list
> Linux-mediatek at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list