Messages in this thread | | | From | "Liao, Bard" <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH] soundwire: add slave device to linked list after device_register() | Date | Mon, 19 Apr 2021 01:46:46 +0000 |
| |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com> > Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 2:31 AM > To: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>; Bard Liao <yung- > chuan.liao@linux.intel.com> > Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org; gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; linux- > kernel@vger.kernel.org; hui.wang@canonical.com; > srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org; Kale, Sanyog R <sanyog.r.kale@intel.com>; > rander.wang@linux.intel.com; Liao, Bard <bard.liao@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] soundwire: add slave device to linked list after > device_register() > > Hi Vinod, > > >> We currently add the slave device to a linked list before > >> device_register(), and then remove it if device_register() fails. > >> > >> It's not clear why this sequence was necessary, this patch moves the > >> linked list management to after the device_register(). > > > > Maybe add a comment :-) > > > > The reason here is that before calling device_register() we need to be > > ready and completely initialized. device_register is absolutely the > > last step in the flow, always. > > > > The probe of the device can happen and before you get a chance to add > > to list, many number of things can happen.. So adding after is not a > > very good idea :) > > Can you describe that 'many number of things' in the SoundWire context? > > While you are correct in general on the use of device_register(), in this specific > case the device registration and the possible Slave driver probe if there's a > match doesn't seem to use this linked list. > > This sdw_slave_add() routine is called while parsing ACPI/DT tables and at this > point the bus isn't functional. This sequence only deals with device registration > and driver probe, the actual activation and enumeration happen much later. > What does matter is that by the time all ACPI/DT devices have been scanned all > initialization is complete. The last part of the flow is not the device_register() at > the individual peripheral level. > > Even for the Qualcomm case, the steps are different: > > ret = sdw_bus_master_add(&ctrl->bus, dev, dev->fwnode); > if (ret) { > dev_err(dev, "Failed to register Soundwire controller (%d)\n", > ret); > goto err_clk; > } > > qcom_swrm_init(ctrl); <<< that's where the bus is functional > > Note that we are not going to lay on the tracks for this, this sequence was > tagged by static analysis tools who don't understand that > put_device() actually frees memory by way of the .release callback, but that led > us to ask ourselves whether this sequence was actually necessary.
Hi Vinod,
Do you have any comment or objection after Pierre's explanation?
Regards, Bard
| |