On Thu, 13 Oct 2011, Grant Likely wrote: > For the deferred case; here is an example of the additional > constraint. Consider the following hierarchy: > > -A > +-B > | +-C > | +-D > | > +-E > +-F > +-G > > dpm_list could be ordered in at least the following ways (depending on > exactly when devices get registered). There are many permutation, but > children are always be listed after its direct parent. > > 1) ABECDFG (breadth first) > 2) AEBFGCD (breadth first) > 3) ABCDEFG (depth first) > 4) AEFGBCD (depth first) > > Now, assume that device B depends on device F, and also assume that > there is no way either to express that in the hierarchy or even for > the constraint to be known at device registration time (the is exactly > the situation we're dealing with on embedded platforms). Only the > driver for B knows that it needs a resource provided by F's driver. > So, the situation becomes that the ordering of dpm_list must now also > be sorted so that non-tree dependencies are also accounted for. Of > the list above, only sort order 4 meets the new constraint. > > The question then becomes, how can the dpm_list get resorted > dynamically at runtime to ensure that the new constraints are always > met without breaking old ones. Here are some options I can think of: This was a long message and I haven't absorbed the whole thing. However it's worth pointing out right at the start that we already have device_pm_move_before(), device_pm_move_after(), and device_pm_move_last(). They are intended specifically to provide drivers with a way of making sure that dpm_list is in the right order -- people have been aware of these issues for some time. Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
