On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 9:39 AM Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 12:04:21PM +0200, sascha hauer wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 01:03:43AM -0700, Saravana Kannan wrote: > > ... > > > I wonder if it wouldn't be a better approach to just probe all devices > > and record the device(node) they are waiting on. Then you know that you > > don't need to probe them again until the device they are waiting for > > is available. > > There may be no device, but resource. And we become again to the something > like > deferred probe ugly hack. > > The real solution is to rework device driver model in the kernel that it will > create a graph of dependencies and then simply follow it. But actually it > should > be more than 1 graph, because there are resources and there are power, clock > and > resets that may be orthogonal to the higher dependencies (like driver X > provides > a resource to driver Y).
We already do this with fw_devlink for DT based systems and we do effectively just probe the devices in graph order (by deferring any attempts that happen too early and before it even gets to the driver). The problem is the knowledge of what's considered an optional vs mandatory dependency and that's affected by the global state of driver support in the kernel. -Saravana _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list email@example.com https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu