lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [May]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RESEND][PATCH] Bluetooth: Make request workqueue freezable
At Thu, 21 May 2015 13:37:56 -0400 (EDT),
Alan Stern wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 May 2015, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>
> > At Thu, 21 May 2015 11:26:17 -0400 (EDT),
> > Alan Stern wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 21 May 2015, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > >
> > > > At Thu, 21 May 2015 10:18:08 -0400 (EDT),
> > > > Alan Stern wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 21 May 2015, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Then avoiding the failed firmware is no solution, indeed.
> > > > > > If it's a new probe, it should be never executed during resume.
> > > > >
> > > > > Can you expand this comment? What's wrong with probing during resume?
> > > >
> > > > Well, if the probe requires the access to a user-space file, it can't
> > > > be done during resume. That's the very problem we're seeing now.
> > > > The firmware loader can't help much alone if it's a new device
> > > > object.
> > >
> > > But the same thing happens during early boot, if the driver is built
> > > into the kernel. When the probe occurs, userspace isn't up and running
> > > yet, so the firmware loader can't do anything.
> > >
> > > Why should probe during resume be any worse than probe during early
> > > boot?
> >
> > The early boot has initrd, so the files can be there. But the resume
> > has no way to fetch the file except for cached data.
>
> I suppose USB could delay re-probing until userspace is running again,
> if we knew when that was. But it would be awkward and prone to races.
> It also would leave a user-visible window of time during which the
> device does not exist, which we want to avoid. (This may not matter
> for bluetooth, but it does matter for other kinds of devices.)

Right.

> I would prefer to solve this problem in a different way, if possible.

Well, we're back in square again :)

But, before going further the discussion in loop again, I'd like to
know which firmware file actually hits. Is it a non-existing
firmware? Or is it a firmware that should have been cached? In the
latter case, why it isn't used?


Takashi


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-05-21 21:01    [W:0.112 / U:0.460 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site