On Monday, December 10, 2012 03:22:48 PM Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Monday, December 10, 2012 09:07:06 AM Yinghai Lu wrote: > >> On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 6:46 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > On Sunday, December 09, 2012 09:34:42 PM Yinghai Lu wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Can we expand the BUS_ADD_* concept to other devices instead of just > >> >> acpi_device? > >> >> > >> >> aka we should let struct device has this add_type field. > >> > > >> > Having done that in ACPI to cover our use case here, we can try to move it > >> > into struct device if there are use cases beyond ACPI that can't be covered > >> > by using deferred driver probing. > >> > >> pci device for hotplug have same problem. need to delay driver attach > >> for them too. > > > > OK, I'll take a look. Any pointers to speed that up? > > > >> also BUS_ADD_MATCH and BUS_ADD_START are duplicated. > > > > Not at the moment, they do different things as code goes. > > I do think that is same problem which is in the driver/base core. > > it should support delay loading driver for the hotplug case at the first point. > that is reason that .start is introduced for acpi driver..to workround > the problem > in driver core. OK, but let's eliminate .start() first and then go make changes to the driver core. That is, let's take one step at a time. :-) > >> old add are separated to adding all devices to tree and then matching > >> work to load the drivers. > >> > >> so _START is not needed anymore, only user.start in pci_root driver > >> should be removed. > >> code in .start could be moved .add without problem. > > > > Yes, I'm going to do that as the next step. I didn't want this particular > > after you remove that .start, that will the same as my two patches. > except that you patches toggle that per-device add_type for every device. > > and my patches is only toggle that per device drivers_autoprobe for > hot-add devices. I'm not 100% sure of that, but quite likely that's the case. I'd like to avoid special-casing hotplug in any way, if possible. Also, I have other reasons to do it for all devices (like the resources management for one example). > > patchset to grow too big. I'll post another one on top of it if people > > don't have problems with this one. > > yesterday, I replace my two acpi driver delay loading patches with your patches. > > during pci root bus hot remove/add test, got the panic... I don't see what the reason may be at the moment, it would be good to get more info (like a screenshot of the panic). > did not have time to look at it yet. OK Thanks, Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. -- 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
