Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 25 Jan 2021 20:49:32 +0100 | From | Michael Walle <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] PCI: dwc: layerscape: convert to builtin_platform_driver() |
| |
Am 2021-01-21 12:01, schrieb Geert Uytterhoeven: > Hi Saravana, > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 1:05 AM Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com> > wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 3:53 PM Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc> >> wrote: >> > Am 2021-01-20 20:47, schrieb Saravana Kannan: >> > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 11:28 AM Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc> >> > > wrote: >> > >> >> > >> [RESEND, fat-fingered the buttons of my mail client and converted >> > >> all CCs to BCCs :(] >> > >> >> > >> Am 2021-01-20 20:02, schrieb Saravana Kannan: >> > >> > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 6:24 AM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote: >> > >> >> >> > >> >> On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 4:53 AM Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc> >> > >> >> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> > fw_devlink will defer the probe until all suppliers are ready. We can't >> > >> >> > use builtin_platform_driver_probe() because it doesn't retry after probe >> > >> >> > deferral. Convert it to builtin_platform_driver(). >> > >> >> >> > >> >> If builtin_platform_driver_probe() doesn't work with fw_devlink, then >> > >> >> shouldn't it be fixed or removed? >> > >> > >> > >> > I was actually thinking about this too. The problem with fixing >> > >> > builtin_platform_driver_probe() to behave like >> > >> > builtin_platform_driver() is that these probe functions could be >> > >> > marked with __init. But there are also only 20 instances of >> > >> > builtin_platform_driver_probe() in the kernel: >> > >> > $ git grep ^builtin_platform_driver_probe | wc -l >> > >> > 20 >> > >> > >> > >> > So it might be easier to just fix them to not use >> > >> > builtin_platform_driver_probe(). >> > >> > >> > >> > Michael, >> > >> > >> > >> > Any chance you'd be willing to help me by converting all these to >> > >> > builtin_platform_driver() and delete builtin_platform_driver_probe()? >> > >> >> > >> If it just moving the probe function to the _driver struct and >> > >> remove the __init annotations. I could look into that. >> > > >> > > Yup. That's pretty much it AFAICT. >> > > >> > > builtin_platform_driver_probe() also makes sure the driver doesn't ask >> > > for async probe, etc. But I doubt anyone is actually setting async >> > > flags and still using builtin_platform_driver_probe(). >> > >> > Hasn't module_platform_driver_probe() the same problem? And there >> > are ~80 drivers which uses that. >> >> Yeah. The biggest problem with all of these is the __init markers. >> Maybe some familiar with coccinelle can help? > > And dropping them will increase memory usage.
Although I do have the changes for the builtin_platform_driver_probe() ready, I don't think it makes much sense to send these unless we agree on the increased memory footprint. While there are just a few builtin_platform_driver_probe() and memory increase _might_ be negligible, there are many more module_platform_driver_probe().
-michael
| |