On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 00:12:56 +0100, Sylwester Nawrocki <sylvester.nawrocki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 03/08/2012 03:51 PM, Thierry Reding wrote: > > From: Grant Likely<grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > 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@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > [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. Greg has sent it on to Linus for merging, so yes. g. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
