Sherry Moore wrote:
> Hi Garrett,
>
>
>> So one thing that is slightly confusing to me is, why do we need both
>> ddi_no_quiesce(), and ddi_quiesce_not_supported()? And how is the entry
>> point being NULL interpreted?
>>
>> It *seems* (and maybe I'm being naive here), that
>> ddi_quiesce_not_supported() may not have much value -- drivers that have a
>> bug where quiesce is necessary but lack the current can just implement a
>> trivial "return DDI_FAILURE" quiesce in the meantime -- not much more
>> effort than stubbing in the ddi_quiesce_not_supported(). Additionally,
>> unlike the ddi_no_quiesce() case, the driver is going to need to be
>> modified at some point anyway, right?
>>
>
> NULL entry point will be treated the same as ddi_quiesce_not_supported()
> (or whatever function name we eventually settle on).
>
> These functions are introduced so that when new driver developers start
> writing drivers by making copies of existing ones, it is clear that
> devo_quiesce is a dev_op that needs to be implemented, or set to
> ddi_no_quiesce() or ddi_quiesce_not_supported. If it is set to
> ddi_quiesce_not_supported, I would like to see someone on the ARC
> committee asking, "Uh, why is quiesce not supported?" :)
>
So, rather than creating a new entry point for this, can't we instead
just make this a new question to add to the 20 questions?
> In addition, we have a clear picture on the number of drivers that
> don't require quiesce, and those that do but haven't implemented it
> yet. In other words, one can simply look for ddi_no_quiesce and
> ddi_quiesce_not_supported in cscope instead of dev_ops and manually
> sort through them.
>
Hmm... that seems like a temporary problem to solve. I don't mind
having that as an implementation detail, but I question whether
ddi_not_supported() really needs to be part of the official DDI. I'd
rather not have it be a documented interface.
>
>> Finally, it may be informative/helpful to list some example drivers in the
>> case materials that need to have quiesce implemented, as well as perhaps a
>> couple that don't.
>>
>
> Will do. I have write that up and have Jerry copy to the materials
> directory.
>
Thanks.
-- Garrett
> Thanks,
> Sherry
>
