On 2/10/21 12:52 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 7:10 AM Guenter Roeck <li...@roeck-us.net> wrote: >> >> On 2/10/21 12:20 AM, Saravana Kannan wrote: >>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 9:54 PM Guenter Roeck <li...@roeck-us.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 07:17:03PM -0800, Saravana Kannan wrote: >>>>> Cyclic dependencies in some firmware was one of the last remaining >>>>> reasons fw_devlink=on couldn't be set by default. Now that cyclic >>>>> dependencies don't block probing, set fw_devlink=on by default. >>>>> >>>>> Setting fw_devlink=on by default brings a bunch of benefits (currently, >>>>> only for systems with device tree firmware): >>>>> * Significantly cuts down deferred probes. >>>>> * Device probe is effectively attempted in graph order. >>>>> * Makes it much easier to load drivers as modules without having to >>>>> worry about functional dependencies between modules (depmod is still >>>>> needed for symbol dependencies). >>>>> >>>>> If this patch prevents some devices from probing, it's very likely due >>>>> to the system having one or more device drivers that "probe"/set up a >>>>> device (DT node with compatible property) without creating a struct >>>>> device for it. If we hit such cases, the device drivers need to be >>>>> fixed so that they populate struct devices and probe them like normal >>>>> device drivers so that the driver core is aware of the devices and their >>>>> status. See [1] for an example of such a case. >>>>> >>>>> [1] - >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAGETcx9PiX==mlxb9po8myyk6u2vhpvwtmsa5nkd-ywh5xh...@mail.gmail.com/ >>>>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <sarava...@google.com> >>>> >>>> This patch breaks nios2 boot tests in qemu. The system gets stuck when >>>> trying to reboot. Reverting this patch fixes the problem. Bisect log >>>> is attached. >>> >>> Thanks for the report Guenter. Can you please try this series? >>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210205222644.2357303-1-sarava...@google.com/ >>> >> >> Not this week. I have lots of reviews to complete before the end of the week, >> with the 5.12 commit window coming up. > > Ok. By next week, all the fixes should be in linux-next too. So it > should be easier if you choose to test. > >> Given the number of problems observed, I personally think that it is way >> too early for this patch. We'll have no end of problems if it is applied >> to the upstream kernel in the next commit window. Of course, that is just >> my personal opinion. > > You had said "with 115 of 430 boot tests failing in -next" earlier. > Just to be sure I understand it right, you are not saying this patch > caused them all right? You are just saying that 115 general boot > failures that might mask fw_devlink issues in some of them, right? >
Correct. Guenter
