Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220601070707.3946847-1-saravanak@google.com>
 <CAMuHMdXkX-SXtBuTRGJOUnpw9goSP6RFr_PTt_3w_yWgBpWsqg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGETcx9f0UBhpp6dM+KJwtYpLx19wwsq6_ygi3En7FrXobOSpA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGETcx8VM+xOCe7HEx9FUU-1B9nrX8Q=tE=NjTyb9uX2_8RXLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMuHMdXzu8Vp=a7fyjOB=xt04aee=vWXV=TcRZeeKUGYFFZ1CA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGETcx_Nqo4ju7cWwO3dP3YM2wpCb0jx23OHOReexOjpT5pATA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMuHMdXQCwMQj_ZiOBAzusdCxd8w6NbTqD_7nzykhVs+UWx8Gw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGETcx8UO=4mk31tU4QaWU3RaNM_myA9woe0idBp6p7+X5AEgg@mail.gmail.com> <20220608154908.4ddb9795@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20220608154908.4ddb9795@kernel.org>
From:   Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Jun 2022 16:15:07 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGETcx_ZPB2ce-7Zf-bVy4hHe8Nvk62_7HVeO1dhQvg1iuHQDw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] deferred_probe_timeout logic clean up
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>,
        Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@android.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux IOMMU <iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Niklas_S=C3=B6derlund?= 
        <niklas.soderlund+renesas@ragnatech.se>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tbogendoerfer@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 3:49 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 8 Jun 2022 14:07:44 -0700 Saravana Kannan wrote:
> > David/Jakub,
> >
> > Do the IP4 autoconfig changes look reasonable to you?
>
> I'm no expert in this area, I'd trust the opinion of the embedded folks
> (adding Florian as well) more than myself.

Thanks.

> It's unclear to me why we'd
> wait_for_init_devices_probe() after the first failed iteration,

wait_for_init_devices_probe() relaxes ordering rules for all devices
and it's not something we want to do unless we really need it. That's
why we are doing that only if we can't find any network device in the
first iteration.

> sleep,
> and then allow 11 more iterations with wait_for_device_probe().
> Let me also add Thomas since he wrote e2ffe3ff6f5e ("net: ipconfig:
> Wait for deferred device probes").

Even without this change, I'm not sure the wait_for_device_probe()
needs to be within the loop. It's probably sufficient to just do it
once in the beginning, but it's already there and I'm not sure if I'm
missing some scenarios, so I left that part as is.

-Saravana