On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 8:03 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 07:57:28PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> > I think we >> > just should make exceptions sensible so that it works fine in practice >> > for now (and I don't think that'd be too hard). So, the only >> > cooperation necessary from userland would be just saying "I don't >> > wanna wait for device probing on module load." >> >> But we're talking about drivers that have a flag that says 'you gotta >> wait sucker', what do we want systemd to do then? I'd be happy if it'd >> would not send the sigkill for these drivers, for example. > > Hah? Can you give me an example? I'm having hard time imagining a > driver with such requirement given our current driver core > implementation. I didn't say I had one in mind, but if you're certain these *shouldn't exist* that's sufficient by me as well. OK so I'll respin this series to enable a sysctl that would enable async probe for *all drivers* using queue_work(system_unbound_wq) and only use sync probe for now on request_module() users, we'll address scheduling issues as they come up. I'll be ignoring built-in. On the systemd side of things it should enable this sysctl and for older kernels what should it do? Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
