Thread (9 messages) flat view 9 messages, 4 authors, 2017-10-26

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] net: dsa: don't unmask port bitmaps

From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Date: 2017-10-26 08:07:49
Also in: lkml

From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2017 11:22:34 +0200
quoted
In case of probe deferral, you get the full probe function to exit with
an error, and that usually involves freeing the recently allocated
dsa_switch instance, and then allocating a new one when probe is
re-entered, so that should not be a problem.
Hi Florian

That is the simple case. I remember having problems with more complex
cases, D in DSA. Switches 1 and 2 probe O.K, switch 3 fail with
EPROBE_DEFER. Switch 3, as you say, releases its dsa_switch instance,
so will get a freshly zero'ed new instance when it probes
again. However, switches 1 and 2 only experience the unwind at the DSA
level. The devices are not removed and later probed again. They have a
'dirty' dsa_switch structure the next time they are applied.

I just think there might be potential for regressions here. But i've
not yet looked at the details to really know if there actually is.
I realize there is still some trepidation about these patches, but it
seems like the only real way to find out if it causes regressions is
to apply them and watch carefully.

So I've applied this and if anything pops up we can easily revert.

Thanks.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help