lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Feb]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: broken probe deferred for power-domains
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 8:18 PM Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> Hello Rob,
>
> Your patch e01afc325025 ("PM / Domains: Stop deferring probe
> at the end of initcall") breaks deferred probe for power domains.

With all the dependencies built-in, right?

What board in case I have one?

> The patch looks like this:
>
> +++ b/drivers/base/power/domain.c
> @@ -2253,7 +2253,7 @@ static int __genpd_dev_pm_attach(struct device *dev, struct device_node *np,
> mutex_unlock(&gpd_list_lock);
> dev_dbg(dev, "%s() failed to find PM domain: %ld\n",
> __func__, PTR_ERR(pd));
> - return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> + return driver_deferred_probe_check_state(dev);
> }
>
>
> Having two drivers (both using module_platform_driver),
> one being a PD provider and one being a PD consumer.
>
> Before your patch:
> The PD consumer driver calls dev_pm_domain_attach(),
> and gets EPROBE_DEFER until the PD provider driver
> has been probed successfully.
>
> (The PD provider driver needs some regulators, so it
> is only successfully probed after the regulator driver
> has been probed successfully.)
>
> Anyway, dev_pm_domain_attach() returned success after
> the some deferred probes.
>
>
> After your patch:
> dev_pm_domain_attach() return ENODEV,
> which comes from driver_deferred_probe_check_state().
> Since it returns ENODEV rather than EPROBE_DEFER,
> the PD consumer driver fails to probe.
>
>
> The problem is related to your other patch 25b4e70dcce9
> ("driver core: allow stopping deferred probe after init").
>
> driver_deferred_probe_check_state() returns ENODEV if
> initcalls_done == true.
>
> initcalls_done is set from late_initcall(deferred_probe_initcall),
> in drivers/base/dd.c:
> driver_deferred_probe_trigger();
> flush_work(&deferred_probe_work);
> initcalls_done = true;
>
> This does not seem very robust, since
>
> #1 It does not handle the case where two drivers have been
> deferred (put in the deferred probe pending list),
> where additionally one of the drivers has to be probed
> before the other.
>
> (We would need to call driver_deferred_probe_trigger() + flush_work()
> at least twice to handle this.)
>
> #2 Since this code is run from late_initcall(),
> initcalls_done might get set before other drivers using late_initcall()
> have even had a chance to run.

IMO, we should not have drivers using late_initcall. We need some
level just to do things at the end of boot. The same fragility exists
with the clock and regulator disabling.

> I can imagine that a driver using late_initcall() + EPROBE_DEFER
> will absolutely not work with this code.
>
>
> This patch fixes #1, but not #2.
> However, I assume that even this change would not work if we have 3
> drivers, where each driver a > b > c has to be probed, in that order.
> (and all of them were placed in the deferred probe pending list).

I thought a successful probe would trigger a retry too. I need to look
at it again.

Maybe it would be more robust to re-trigger probe until the pending
list doesn't change. Then we could handle any length of dependencies.

>
> Suggestions and patches are welcome.
>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/dd.c b/drivers/base/dd.c
> index a823f469e53f..3443cb78be9b 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/dd.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/dd.c
> @@ -288,7 +288,6 @@ static int deferred_probe_initcall(void)
> driver_deferred_probe_trigger();
> /* Sort as many dependencies as possible before exiting initcalls */
> flush_work(&deferred_probe_work);
> - initcalls_done = true;
>
> /*
> * Trigger deferred probe again, this time we won't defer anything
> @@ -297,6 +296,8 @@ static int deferred_probe_initcall(void)
> driver_deferred_probe_trigger();
> flush_work(&deferred_probe_work);
>
> + initcalls_done = true;
> +
> if (deferred_probe_timeout > 0) {
> schedule_delayed_work(&deferred_probe_timeout_work,
> deferred_probe_timeout * HZ);
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
> Niklas

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-02-28 00:32    [W:0.036 / U:4.900 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site