Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 7 Jan 2016 13:29:24 -0800 | From | Greg Kroah-Hartman <> | Subject | Re: [RFD] Functional dependencies between devices |
| |
On Thu, Jan 07, 2016 at 03:55:43PM +0100, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > On 30 October 2015 at 23:52, Greg Kroah-Hartman > <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 04:24:14PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> My idea is to represent a supplier-consumer dependency between devices (or > >> more precisely between device+driver combos) as a "link" object containing > >> pointers to the devices in question, a list node for each of them and some > >> additional information related to the management of those objects, ie. > >> something like: > >> > >> struct device_link { > >> struct device *supplier; > >> struct list_head supplier_node; > >> struct device *consumer; > >> struct list_head consumer_node; > >> <flags, status etc> > >> }; > >> > >> In general, there will be two lists of those things per device, one list > >> of links to consumers and one list of links to suppliers. > >> > >> In that picture, links will be created by calling, say: > >> > >> int device_add_link(struct device *me, struct device *my_supplier, unsigned int flags); > > > > At first glance, I like this, nice. Now to see how well it can be > > implemented :) > > Hi Greg, > > what's your opinion on using this to order device probes so we don't > try to probe a device that we know it has unfulfilled dependencies?
Why would that matter, unless you can prove it's faster, I wouldn't bother.
greg k-h
| |