lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Jan]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-01-07 23:01    [W:0.071 / U:0.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site