lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] dd: Invoke one probe retry cycle after every initcall level
On 2018-08-10 00:10, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 12:30 AM, <rishabhb@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> On 2018-08-06 01:53, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 12:20 AM, Sodagudi Prasad
>>> <psodagud@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> From: RAFAEL J. WYSOCKI <rafael@kernel.org>
>>>>> Date: Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 2:21 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] dd: Invoke one probe retry cycle after every
>>>>> initcall level
>>>>> To: Rishabh Bhatnagar <rishabhb@codeaurora.org>
>>>>> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman
>>>>> <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List
>>>>> <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, ckadabi@codeaurora.org,
>>>>> tsoni@codeaurora.org, Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@codeaurora.org>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 11:18 PM, <rishabhb@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2018-07-24 01:24, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 10:22 PM, <rishabhb@codeaurora.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2018-07-23 04:17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:24 PM, Rishabh Bhatnagar
>>>>>>>>> <rishabhb@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Drivers that are registered at an initcall level may have to
>>>>>>>>>> wait until late_init before the probe deferral mechanism can
>>>>>>>>>> retry their probe functions. It is possible that their
>>>>>>>>>> dependencies were resolved much earlier, in some cases even
>>>>>>>>>> before the next initcall level. Invoke one probe retry cycle
>>>>>>>>>> at every _sync initcall level, allowing these drivers to be
>>>>>>>>>> probed earlier.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Can you please say something about the actual use case this is
>>>>>>>>> expected to address?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We have a display driver that depends 3 other devices to be
>>>>>>>> probed so that it can bring-up the display. Because of
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> dependencies
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> not being met the deferral mechanism defers the probes for a
>>>>>>>> later
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> time,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> even though the dependencies might be met earlier. With this
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> change
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> display can be brought up much earlier.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OK
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What runlevel brings up the display after the change?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Rafael
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After the change the display can come up after device_initcall
>>>>>> level
>>>>>> itself.
>>>>>> The above mentioned 3 devices are probed at 0.503253, 0.505210 and
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 0.523264
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> secs.
>>>>>> Only the first device is probed successfully. With the current
>>>>>> deferral mechanism the devices get probed again after
>>>>>> late_initcall
>>>>>> at 9.19 and 9.35 secs. So display can only come up after 9.35
>>>>>> secs.
>>>>>> With this change the devices are re-probed successfully at 0.60
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> 0.613 secs. Therefore display can come just after 0.613 secs.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> OK, so why do you touch the initcall levels earlier than device_?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1) re-probe probing devices in the active list on every level
>>>> help
>>>> to
>>>> avoid circular dependency pending list.
>>>> 2) There are so many devices which gets deferred in earlier
>>>> init
>>>> call
>>>> levels, so we wanted to reprobe them at every successive init call
>>>> level.
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you have specific examples of devices for which that helps?
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> This change helps in overall android bootup as well.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> How exactly?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We have seen less no of re-probes at late_init and most of the
>>>> driver's
>>>> dependency met earlier than late_init call level. It helped display
>>>> and
>>>> couple of other drivers by executing the re probe work at every init
>>>> level.
>>>
>>>
>>> So I can believe that walking the deferred list on device_initcall
>>> and
>>> maybe on device_initcall_sync may help, but I'm not quite convinced
>>> that it matters for the earlier initcall levels.
>>
>>
>> Many of our drivers are dependent on the regulator and bus driver.
>> Both the regulator and bus driver are probed in the subsys_initcall
>> level.
>> Now the probe of bus driver requires regulator to be working. If the
>> probe
>> of
>> bus driver happens before regulator, then bus driver's probe will be
>> deferred and all other device's probes which depend on bus driver will
>> also
>> be deferred.
>> The impact of this problem is reduced if we have this patch.
>
> Fair enough, but this information should be there in the changelog of
> your patch.
>
> And why do you do that for arch_initcall_sync()?
<Prasad> You are right and we can remove arch_initcall_sync().

Added some logging and observed that, none of the devices are re-probed
in the arch_initcall_sync level.

-Thanks, Prasad
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora
Forum,
Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-10 19:20    [W:0.051 / U:0.984 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site