From: Mao Jinlong <[email protected]>
It is possible that when device probe, its child device is not
probed. Then it will fail when add sysfs connection for the device.
Make device defer probe when the child device is not probed.
Signed-off-by: Mao Jinlong <[email protected]>
---
drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c
index 34d2a2d31d00..7df9eb59bf2c 100644
--- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c
+++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c
@@ -73,8 +73,10 @@ int coresight_add_sysfs_link(struct coresight_sysfs_link *info)
if (!info->orig || !info->target ||
!info->orig_name || !info->target_name)
return -EINVAL;
- if (!info->orig->has_conns_grp || !info->target->has_conns_grp)
+ if (!info->orig->has_conns_grp)
return -EINVAL;
+ if (!info->target->has_conns_grp)
+ return -EPROBE_DEFER;
/* first link orig->target */
ret = sysfs_add_link_to_group(&info->orig->dev.kobj,
--
2.17.1
Hi Jinlong
On 28/02/2022 13:31, Mao Jinlong wrote:
> From: Mao Jinlong <[email protected]>
>
> It is possible that when device probe, its child device is not
> probed. Then it will fail when add sysfs connection for the device.
> Make device defer probe when the child device is not probed.
Please could you a bit a more specific on the exact issue ?
I don't see a problem with probe deferral right now, with
coresight/next.
For e.g.,
root@juno-server:~# lsmod
Module Size Used by
coresight 73728 0
root@juno-server:~# ls /sys/bus/coresight/devices/
root@juno-server:~# modprobe coresight-etm4x
root@juno-server:~# lsmod
Module Size Used by
coresight_etm4x 81920 0
coresight 73728 1 coresight_etm4x
root@juno-server:~# ls /sys/bus/coresight/devices/
etm0 etm1
-- Note etm2-etm5 doesn't appear --
root@juno-server:~# modprobe coresight-funnel
root@juno-server:~# lsmod
Module Size Used by
coresight_funnel 20480 0
coresight_etm4x 81920 0
coresight 73728 2 coresight_etm4x,coresight_funnel
root@juno-server:~# ls /sys/bus/coresight/devices/
etm0 etm1
-- Still don't appear ---
root@juno-server:~# modprobe coresight-replicator
root@juno-server:~# ls /sys/bus/coresight/devices/
etm0 etm1
root@juno-server:~# modprobe coresight-tmc
-- At this stage, the devices automatically get probed and appear --
root@juno-server:~# ls /sys/bus/coresight/devices/
etm0 etm1 etm2 etm3 etm4 etm5 funnel0 funnel1 funnel2 tmc_etf0
tmc_etr0
root@juno-server:~# lsmod
Module Size Used by
coresight_tmc 40960 0
coresight_replicator 20480 0
coresight_funnel 20480 0
coresight_etm4x 81920 0
coresight 73728 4
coresight_tmc,coresight_etm4x,coresight_replicator,coresight_funnel
So, my question is, what is this patch trying to solve ?
Cheers
Suzuki
>
> Signed-off-by: Mao Jinlong <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c
> index 34d2a2d31d00..7df9eb59bf2c 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c
> @@ -73,8 +73,10 @@ int coresight_add_sysfs_link(struct coresight_sysfs_link *info)
> if (!info->orig || !info->target ||
> !info->orig_name || !info->target_name)
> return -EINVAL;
> - if (!info->orig->has_conns_grp || !info->target->has_conns_grp)
> + if (!info->orig->has_conns_grp)
> return -EINVAL;
> + if (!info->target->has_conns_grp)
> + return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>
> /* first link orig->target */
> ret = sysfs_add_link_to_group(&info->orig->dev.kobj,
Hi,
On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 at 11:42, Jinlong Mao <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 2/28/2022 10:51 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>
> Hi Jinlong
>
> On 28/02/2022 13:31, Mao Jinlong wrote:
>
> From: Mao Jinlong <[email protected]>
>
> It is possible that when device probe, its child device is not
> probed. Then it will fail when add sysfs connection for the device.
> Make device defer probe when the child device is not probed.
>
>
> Please could you a bit a more specific on the exact issue ?
> I don't see a problem with probe deferral right now, with
> coresight/next.
>
> For e.g.,
>
> root@juno-server:~# lsmod
> Module Size Used by
> coresight 73728 0
> root@juno-server:~# ls /sys/bus/coresight/devices/
> root@juno-server:~# modprobe coresight-etm4x
> root@juno-server:~# lsmod
> Module Size Used by
> coresight_etm4x 81920 0
> coresight 73728 1 coresight_etm4x
> root@juno-server:~# ls /sys/bus/coresight/devices/
> etm0 etm1
>
> -- Note etm2-etm5 doesn't appear --
>
> root@juno-server:~# modprobe coresight-funnel
> root@juno-server:~# lsmod
> Module Size Used by
> coresight_funnel 20480 0
> coresight_etm4x 81920 0
> coresight 73728 2 coresight_etm4x,coresight_funnel
> root@juno-server:~# ls /sys/bus/coresight/devices/
> etm0 etm1
>
> -- Still don't appear ---
>
> root@juno-server:~# modprobe coresight-replicator
> root@juno-server:~# ls /sys/bus/coresight/devices/
> etm0 etm1
> root@juno-server:~# modprobe coresight-tmc
>
> -- At this stage, the devices automatically get probed and appear --
> root@juno-server:~# ls /sys/bus/coresight/devices/
> etm0 etm1 etm2 etm3 etm4 etm5 funnel0 funnel1 funnel2 tmc_etf0 tmc_etr0
>
>
> root@juno-server:~# lsmod
> Module Size Used by
> coresight_tmc 40960 0
> coresight_replicator 20480 0
> coresight_funnel 20480 0
> coresight_etm4x 81920 0
> coresight 73728 4 coresight_tmc,coresight_etm4x,coresight_replicator,coresight_funnel
>
> So, my question is, what is this patch trying to solve ?
>
>
> Cheers
> Suzuki
>
> Hi Suzuki,
>
> This issue happens when race condition happens.
> The condition is that the device and its child_device's probe happens at the same time.
>
> For example: device0 and its child device device1.
> Both of them are calling coresight_register function. device0 is calling coresight_fixup_device_conns.
> device1 is waiting for device0 to release the coresight_mutex. Because device1's csdev node is allocated,
> coresight_make_links will be called for device0. Then in coresight_add_sysfs_link, has_conns_grp is true
> for device0, but has_conns_grp is false for device1 as has_conns_grp is set to true in coresight_create_conns_sysfs_group .
> The probe of device0 will fail for at this condition.
>
>
> struct coresight_device *coresight_register(struct coresight_desc *desc)
> {
> .........
> mutex_lock(&coresight_mutex);
>
> ret = coresight_create_conns_sysfs_group(csdev);
> if (!ret)
> ret = coresight_fixup_device_conns(csdev);
> if (!ret)
> ret = coresight_fixup_orphan_conns(csdev);
> if (!ret && cti_assoc_ops && cti_assoc_ops->add)
> cti_assoc_ops->add(csdev);
>
> mutex_unlock(&coresight_mutex);
>
> .........
>
> }
>
> static int coresight_fixup_device_conns(struct coresight_device *csdev)
> {
> ..........
> conn->child_dev =
> coresight_find_csdev_by_fwnode(conn->child_fwnode);
The issue appears to be a constraint hidden in the lower layers of the code.
Would a better solution not be to alter the code here:
if (conn->child_dev && conn->child_dev->has_conns_grp) {
...
} else {
csdev->orphan = true;
}
which would mean that the connection attempt would drop through to
label the connection as an orphan, to be cleaned up by the child
itself when it runs coresight_fixup_orphan_conns()
Regards
Mike
> if (conn->child_dev) {
> ret = coresight_make_links(csdev, conn,
>
> conn->child_dev);
>
> ..........
>
> }
>
>
> int coresight_add_sysfs_link(struct coresight_sysfs_link *info)
> {
> ................
> if (!info->orig->has_conns_grp || !info->target->has_conns_grp)
> return -EINVAL;
>
>
>
> The probe fail issue is reproduced with reboot stress test on our internal device.
>
> With the patch, the probe fail issue is not reproduced.
>
> Thanks
>
> Jinlong Mao
>
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Mao Jinlong <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c
> index 34d2a2d31d00..7df9eb59bf2c 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c
> @@ -73,8 +73,10 @@ int coresight_add_sysfs_link(struct coresight_sysfs_link *info)
> if (!info->orig || !info->target ||
> !info->orig_name || !info->target_name)
> return -EINVAL;
> - if (!info->orig->has_conns_grp || !info->target->has_conns_grp)
> + if (!info->orig->has_conns_grp)
> return -EINVAL;
> + if (!info->target->has_conns_grp)
> + return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> /* first link orig->target */
> ret = sysfs_add_link_to_group(&info->orig->dev.kobj,
>
>
--
Mike Leach
Principal Engineer, ARM Ltd.
Manchester Design Centre. UK
Hi
On 01/03/2022 13:30, Jinlong Mao wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> On 3/1/2022 9:15 PM, Mike Leach wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 at 11:42, Jinlong Mao <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>> On 2/28/2022 10:51 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>>>
...
>>>
>>> Hi Suzuki,
>>>
>>> This issue happens when race condition happens.
>>> The condition is that the device and its child_device's probe happens
>>> at the same time.
>>>
>>> For example: device0 and its child device device1.
>>> Both of them are calling coresight_register function. device0 is
>>> calling coresight_fixup_device_conns.
>>> device1 is waiting for device0 to release the coresight_mutex.
>>> Because device1's csdev node is allocated,
>>> coresight_make_links will be called for device0. Then in
>>> coresight_add_sysfs_link, has_conns_grp is true
>>> for device0, but has_conns_grp is false for device1 as has_conns_grp
>>> is set to true in coresight_create_conns_sysfs_group .
>>> The probe of device0 will fail for at this condition.
>>>
>>>
>>> struct coresight_device *coresight_register(struct coresight_desc *desc)
>>> {
>>> .........
>>> mutex_lock(&coresight_mutex);
>>>
>>> ret = coresight_create_conns_sysfs_group(csdev);
>>> if (!ret)
>>> ret = coresight_fixup_device_conns(csdev);
>>> if (!ret)
>>> ret = coresight_fixup_orphan_conns(csdev);
>>> if (!ret && cti_assoc_ops && cti_assoc_ops->add)
>>> cti_assoc_ops->add(csdev);
>>>
>>> mutex_unlock(&coresight_mutex);
>>>
>>> .........
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> static int coresight_fixup_device_conns(struct coresight_device *csdev)
>>> {
>>> ..........
>>> conn->child_dev =
>>> coresight_find_csdev_by_fwnode(conn->child_fwnode);
>> The issue appears to be a constraint hidden in the lower layers of the
>> code.
>> Would a better solution not be to alter the code here:
>>
>> if (conn->child_dev && conn->child_dev->has_conns_grp) {
>> ...
>> } else {
>> csdev->orphan = true;
>> }
>>
>> which would mean that the connection attempt would drop through to
>> label the connection as an orphan, to be cleaned up by the child
>> itself when it runs coresight_fixup_orphan_conns()
>>
Tnanks Mike, I think that is a good solution. Alternatively, we
could make sure that device_register() and the fixup following
that are atomic.
i.e.
mutex_lock()
device_register()
fixup_connections()
create_sysfs()
mutex_unlock();
The fix may be a bit invasive than Mike's proposal, but it makes
sure we don't end up with half baked device on the coresight-bus.
Suzuki
Hi Mike,
On 3/1/2022 9:15 PM, Mike Leach wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 at 11:42, Jinlong Mao <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 2/28/2022 10:51 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jinlong
>>
>> On 28/02/2022 13:31, Mao Jinlong wrote:
>>
>> From: Mao Jinlong <[email protected]>
>>
>> It is possible that when device probe, its child device is not
>> probed. Then it will fail when add sysfs connection for the device.
>> Make device defer probe when the child device is not probed.
>>
>>
>> Please could you a bit a more specific on the exact issue ?
>> I don't see a problem with probe deferral right now, with
>> coresight/next.
>>
>> For e.g.,
>>
>> root@juno-server:~# lsmod
>> Module Size Used by
>> coresight 73728 0
>> root@juno-server:~# ls /sys/bus/coresight/devices/
>> root@juno-server:~# modprobe coresight-etm4x
>> root@juno-server:~# lsmod
>> Module Size Used by
>> coresight_etm4x 81920 0
>> coresight 73728 1 coresight_etm4x
>> root@juno-server:~# ls /sys/bus/coresight/devices/
>> etm0 etm1
>>
>> -- Note etm2-etm5 doesn't appear --
>>
>> root@juno-server:~# modprobe coresight-funnel
>> root@juno-server:~# lsmod
>> Module Size Used by
>> coresight_funnel 20480 0
>> coresight_etm4x 81920 0
>> coresight 73728 2 coresight_etm4x,coresight_funnel
>> root@juno-server:~# ls /sys/bus/coresight/devices/
>> etm0 etm1
>>
>> -- Still don't appear ---
>>
>> root@juno-server:~# modprobe coresight-replicator
>> root@juno-server:~# ls /sys/bus/coresight/devices/
>> etm0 etm1
>> root@juno-server:~# modprobe coresight-tmc
>>
>> -- At this stage, the devices automatically get probed and appear --
>> root@juno-server:~# ls /sys/bus/coresight/devices/
>> etm0 etm1 etm2 etm3 etm4 etm5 funnel0 funnel1 funnel2 tmc_etf0 tmc_etr0
>>
>>
>> root@juno-server:~# lsmod
>> Module Size Used by
>> coresight_tmc 40960 0
>> coresight_replicator 20480 0
>> coresight_funnel 20480 0
>> coresight_etm4x 81920 0
>> coresight 73728 4 coresight_tmc,coresight_etm4x,coresight_replicator,coresight_funnel
>>
>> So, my question is, what is this patch trying to solve ?
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>> Suzuki
>>
>> Hi Suzuki,
>>
>> This issue happens when race condition happens.
>> The condition is that the device and its child_device's probe happens at the same time.
>>
>> For example: device0 and its child device device1.
>> Both of them are calling coresight_register function. device0 is calling coresight_fixup_device_conns.
>> device1 is waiting for device0 to release the coresight_mutex. Because device1's csdev node is allocated,
>> coresight_make_links will be called for device0. Then in coresight_add_sysfs_link, has_conns_grp is true
>> for device0, but has_conns_grp is false for device1 as has_conns_grp is set to true in coresight_create_conns_sysfs_group .
>> The probe of device0 will fail for at this condition.
>>
>>
>> struct coresight_device *coresight_register(struct coresight_desc *desc)
>> {
>> .........
>> mutex_lock(&coresight_mutex);
>>
>> ret = coresight_create_conns_sysfs_group(csdev);
>> if (!ret)
>> ret = coresight_fixup_device_conns(csdev);
>> if (!ret)
>> ret = coresight_fixup_orphan_conns(csdev);
>> if (!ret && cti_assoc_ops && cti_assoc_ops->add)
>> cti_assoc_ops->add(csdev);
>>
>> mutex_unlock(&coresight_mutex);
>>
>> .........
>>
>> }
>>
>> static int coresight_fixup_device_conns(struct coresight_device *csdev)
>> {
>> ..........
>> conn->child_dev =
>> coresight_find_csdev_by_fwnode(conn->child_fwnode);
> The issue appears to be a constraint hidden in the lower layers of the code.
> Would a better solution not be to alter the code here:
>
> if (conn->child_dev && conn->child_dev->has_conns_grp) {
> ...
> } else {
> csdev->orphan = true;
> }
>
> which would mean that the connection attempt would drop through to
> label the connection as an orphan, to be cleaned up by the child
> itself when it runs coresight_fixup_orphan_conns()
>
> Regards
>
> Mike
Thanks Mike.
Your recommended fix looks much better than my fix. Let me try with it
and get back to you.
Thanks
Jinlong Mao
>
>> if (conn->child_dev) {
>> ret = coresight_make_links(csdev, conn,
>>
>> conn->child_dev);
>>
>> ..........
>>
>> }
>>
>>
>> int coresight_add_sysfs_link(struct coresight_sysfs_link *info)
>> {
>> ................
>> if (!info->orig->has_conns_grp || !info->target->has_conns_grp)
>> return -EINVAL;
>>
>>
>>
>> The probe fail issue is reproduced with reboot stress test on our internal device.
>>
>> With the patch, the probe fail issue is not reproduced.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jinlong Mao
>>
>>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mao Jinlong <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c | 4 +++-
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c
>> index 34d2a2d31d00..7df9eb59bf2c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-sysfs.c
>> @@ -73,8 +73,10 @@ int coresight_add_sysfs_link(struct coresight_sysfs_link *info)
>> if (!info->orig || !info->target ||
>> !info->orig_name || !info->target_name)
>> return -EINVAL;
>> - if (!info->orig->has_conns_grp || !info->target->has_conns_grp)
>> + if (!info->orig->has_conns_grp)
>> return -EINVAL;
>> + if (!info->target->has_conns_grp)
>> + return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>> /* first link orig->target */
>> ret = sysfs_add_link_to_group(&info->orig->dev.kobj,
>>
>>
>
On 3/1/2022 11:03 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> Hi
>
> On 01/03/2022 13:30, Jinlong Mao wrote:
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> On 3/1/2022 9:15 PM, Mike Leach wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 at 11:42, Jinlong Mao <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 2/28/2022 10:51 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>>>>
>
> ...
>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Suzuki,
>>>>
>>>> This issue happens when race condition happens.
>>>> The condition is that the device and its child_device's probe
>>>> happens at the same time.
>>>>
>>>> For example: device0 and its child device device1.
>>>> Both of them are calling coresight_register function. device0 is
>>>> calling coresight_fixup_device_conns.
>>>> device1 is waiting for device0 to release the coresight_mutex.
>>>> Because device1's csdev node is allocated,
>>>> coresight_make_links will be called for device0. Then in
>>>> coresight_add_sysfs_link, has_conns_grp is true
>>>> for device0, but has_conns_grp is false for device1 as
>>>> has_conns_grp is set to true in coresight_create_conns_sysfs_group .
>>>> The probe of device0 will fail for at this condition.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> struct coresight_device *coresight_register(struct coresight_desc
>>>> *desc)
>>>> {
>>>> .........
>>>> mutex_lock(&coresight_mutex);
>>>>
>>>> ret = coresight_create_conns_sysfs_group(csdev);
>>>> if (!ret)
>>>> ret = coresight_fixup_device_conns(csdev);
>>>> if (!ret)
>>>> ret = coresight_fixup_orphan_conns(csdev);
>>>> if (!ret && cti_assoc_ops && cti_assoc_ops->add)
>>>> cti_assoc_ops->add(csdev);
>>>>
>>>> mutex_unlock(&coresight_mutex);
>>>>
>>>> .........
>>>>
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> static int coresight_fixup_device_conns(struct coresight_device
>>>> *csdev)
>>>> {
>>>> ..........
>>>> conn->child_dev =
>>>> coresight_find_csdev_by_fwnode(conn->child_fwnode);
>>> The issue appears to be a constraint hidden in the lower layers of
>>> the code.
>>> Would a better solution not be to alter the code here:
>>>
>>> if (conn->child_dev && conn->child_dev->has_conns_grp) {
>>> ...
>>> } else {
>>> csdev->orphan = true;
>>> }
>>>
>>> which would mean that the connection attempt would drop through to
>>> label the connection as an orphan, to be cleaned up by the child
>>> itself when it runs coresight_fixup_orphan_conns()
>>>
>
> Tnanks Mike, I think that is a good solution. Alternatively, we
> could make sure that device_register() and the fixup following
> that are atomic.
>
> i.e.
>
> mutex_lock()
>
> device_register()
> fixup_connections()
> create_sysfs()
>
> mutex_unlock();
>
> The fix may be a bit invasive than Mike's proposal, but it makes
> sure we don't end up with half baked device on the coresight-bus.
>
> Suzuki
Thanks Mike & Suzuki.
I will combine your proposals and make the changes.
I will get back to you after the test.
Thanks
Jinlong Mao
On 3/2/2022 10:29 AM, Jinlong Mao wrote:
>
> On 3/1/2022 11:03 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> On 01/03/2022 13:30, Jinlong Mao wrote:
>>> Hi Mike,
>>>
>>> On 3/1/2022 9:15 PM, Mike Leach wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 at 11:42, Jinlong Mao <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 2/28/2022 10:51 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>>>>>
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Suzuki,
>>>>>
>>>>> This issue happens when race condition happens.
>>>>> The condition is that the device and its child_device's probe
>>>>> happens at the same time.
>>>>>
>>>>> For example: device0 and its child device device1.
>>>>> Both of them are calling coresight_register function. device0 is
>>>>> calling coresight_fixup_device_conns.
>>>>> device1 is waiting for device0 to release the coresight_mutex.
>>>>> Because device1's csdev node is allocated,
>>>>> coresight_make_links will be called for device0. Then in
>>>>> coresight_add_sysfs_link, has_conns_grp is true
>>>>> for device0, but has_conns_grp is false for device1 as
>>>>> has_conns_grp is set to true in coresight_create_conns_sysfs_group .
>>>>> The probe of device0 will fail for at this condition.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> struct coresight_device *coresight_register(struct coresight_desc
>>>>> *desc)
>>>>> {
>>>>> .........
>>>>> mutex_lock(&coresight_mutex);
>>>>>
>>>>> ret = coresight_create_conns_sysfs_group(csdev);
>>>>> if (!ret)
>>>>> ret = coresight_fixup_device_conns(csdev);
>>>>> if (!ret)
>>>>> ret = coresight_fixup_orphan_conns(csdev);
>>>>> if (!ret && cti_assoc_ops && cti_assoc_ops->add)
>>>>> cti_assoc_ops->add(csdev);
>>>>>
>>>>> mutex_unlock(&coresight_mutex);
>>>>>
>>>>> .........
>>>>>
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> static int coresight_fixup_device_conns(struct coresight_device
>>>>> *csdev)
>>>>> {
>>>>> ..........
>>>>> conn->child_dev =
>>>>> coresight_find_csdev_by_fwnode(conn->child_fwnode);
>>>> The issue appears to be a constraint hidden in the lower layers of
>>>> the code.
>>>> Would a better solution not be to alter the code here:
>>>>
>>>> if (conn->child_dev && conn->child_dev->has_conns_grp) {
>>>> ...
>>>> } else {
>>>> csdev->orphan = true;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> which would mean that the connection attempt would drop through to
>>>> label the connection as an orphan, to be cleaned up by the child
>>>> itself when it runs coresight_fixup_orphan_conns()
>>>>
>>
>> Tnanks Mike, I think that is a good solution. Alternatively, we
>> could make sure that device_register() and the fixup following
>> that are atomic.
>>
>> i.e.
>>
>> mutex_lock()
>>
>> device_register()
>> fixup_connections()
>> create_sysfs()
>>
>> mutex_unlock();
>>
>> The fix may be a bit invasive than Mike's proposal, but it makes
>> sure we don't end up with half baked device on the coresight-bus.
>>
>> Suzuki
>
> Thanks Mike & Suzuki.
>
> I will combine your proposals and make the changes.
>
> I will get back to you after the test.
Hi Mike & Suzuki,
Issue is fixed with your proposal.
I submit a new patch "coresight: core: Fix coresight device probe
failure issue".
Please help to review.
Thanks
Jinlong Mao
>
>
> Thanks
> Jinlong Mao
>