Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
IronPort-SDR: uiF6sACUtv361W6mPKjOmHze75lhDg10tJTIgAWGEdVcLUF/HiAXnvWRSJx6R3CzgQQTmch0hG
 ZRTNO4yFs5Xg==
IronPort-SDR: 88Vm/iaJ5JzgBwlVh6o6UXLS1iKGkcgdhPzit2FTxm7emrUtmOdXaHAaWP3eB1mkjEFYw+Edl1
 Ux6vl9GIVuNA==
Date:   Tue, 24 Mar 2020 17:47:01 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@linux.intel.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        Felipe Balbi <balbi@kernel.org>,
        Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>,
        Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com>,
        Ferry Toth <fntoth@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] driver core: Break infinite loop when deferred
 probe can't be satisfied
Message-ID: <20200324154701.GQ1922688@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20200324122023.9649-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <CAJZ5v0hQ2vRE8QAWfxwN1auQd5bQS_ROd6do1bMt8GtLtRypRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200324133903.GK1922688@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <CAJZ5v0gcLkymFNktG=46rxRc=KUGyztxYXmSZ51UxkKM6POnow@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0gcLkymFNktG=46rxRc=KUGyztxYXmSZ51UxkKM6POnow@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 04:36:56PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>  On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 2:39 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 01:52:00PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 1:20 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:

...

> > > > +               atomic_dec(&probe_okay);
> > >
> > > Why is this needed?
> >
> > Under successful probe the following is comprehended. When probe of the driver
> > happens it may be discarded (as in above case) as it was initiated by another
> > driver which got deferred.
> >
> > We also discussed this with Peter [1] during his review.
> >
> > [1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/3/12/347
> 
> OK, but I would add a comment explaining that to the code.
> 
> Also it would be good to explain why probe_okay cannot go below zero
> here in the changelog.

Will do, thank you for review!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko