Re: Please revert 5adc55da4a7758021bcc374904b0f8b076508a11 (PCI_MULTITHREAD_PROBE)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 

On Wed, 9 May 2007, Cornelia Huck wrote:


On Wed, 9 May 2007 10:09:33 -0700 (PDT),
[email protected] wrote:


Hm, so that sound like a case for a distinct setup() routine:

1. bus calls ->probe(), which return synchronously
2. bus calls ->probe_async() for all devices (optional)
3. bus waits for all probes to finish
4. bus calls ->setup() for all devices (which does the registering)


this is exactly what I've been trying to describe.


Nearly, but with a slightly different spin...




(->setup() can but need not be sync, although it should be for your
case)


if it's not sync then you have race conditions again


...but not all busses will care. If your bus wants to enforce ordering,
it must enforce it to be sync. If your bus allows hotplug and calling
setup() later on, it may also allow async. (setup() is a bit
dual-purpose in this idea.)
if you want the registration to use hotplug and be async then do do the registration during step 2 and make step 4 be a noop, in fact some drivers may do all their work in step 2, while others (everything currently) will do all their work during step 1 

David Lang


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux