lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Mar]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v9 1/5] driver core: Find an existing link between two devices
From
Date
Hi Lukasz,


On 3/14/2018 5:57 PM, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 12:14:15PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 8:12 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, March 13, 2018 12:23:34 PM CET Tomasz Figa wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 7:34 PM, Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 3:45 PM, Tomasz Figa <tfiga@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 5:55 PM, Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> The lists managing the device-links can be traversed to
>>>>>>>>> find the link between two devices. The device_link_add() APIs
>>>>>>>>> does traverse these lists to check if there's already a link
>>>>>>>>> setup between the two devices.
>>>>>>>>> So, add a new APIs, device_link_find(), to find an existing
>>>>>>>>> device link between two devices - suppliers and consumers.
>>>>>>>> I'm wondering if this API would be useful for anything else that the
>>>>>>>> problem we're trying to solve with deleting links without storing them
>>>>>>>> anywhere. Perhaps a device_link_del_dev(consumer, supplier) would be a
>>>>>>>> better alternative?
>>>>>>> Yea, that sounds simpler i think. Will add this API instead of
>>>>>>> find_link(). Thanks.
>>>>>> Perhaps let's wait for a moment to see if there are other opinions. :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rafael, Lucas, any thoughts?
>>>>> It is not clear to me what the device_link_del_dev(consumer, supplier)
>>>>> would do.
>> Not quite - the issue here is that we have one supplier with an arbitrarily
>> large number of consumers, and would prefer that supplier not to have to
>> spend a whole bunch of memory to store all the struct device_link pointers
>> for the sole reason of having something to give to device_link_del() at the
>> end, given that the device links code is already keeping track of everything
>> internally anyway.
> Makes sense to me. How about an additional flag which autoremoves the
> link on provider unbind?

If I understand this correctly, if we create the device link with
DL_FLAG_AUTOREMOVE, the link is deleted after a consumer unbind. During
a supplier unbind all we get is a WARN_ON with DL_FLAG_AUTOREMOVE. I
guess that's an intended behavior?

If this is the case, then the consumer/supplier drivers just don't have
to take care of deleting the device link explicitly.
Is my understanding correct?

regards
Vivek

>
> Thanks,
>
> Lukas

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-03-20 08:58    [W:0.150 / U:2.592 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site