On 09/06/14 12:40, Ian Lepore wrote:
On Sat, 2014-09-06 at 12:16 -0700, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
Not looking at the code: what happens if you ask for the node
corresponding to a phandle but the device corresponding to that phandle
has not registered yet and it has an implicit crossreference mapping?
-Nathan

The node<->xref behavior is the same as it has always been: if there
isn't a phandle property in a node to supply an xref handle then the
node and xref handles are the synonyms.

The only thing that has changed is that with my first implementation an
xref handle had exist (meaning it had to have been discovered as a
phandle property during the init-time scan of the tree) before you could
associate a device_t with it.  Now you can make associations on the fly
whether the data author intended for such associations to exist or not.
I can't decide whether that's a good or a bad thing.

-- Ian

Thanks for the explanation! That seems like the most reasonable approach.
-Nathan

On 09/06/14 11:43, Ian Lepore wrote:
Author: ian
Date: Sat Sep  6 18:43:17 2014
New Revision: 271202
URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/271202

Log:
    When registering an association between a device and an xref phandle, create
    an entry in the xref list if one doesn't already exist for the given handle.
On a system that uses phandle properties, the init-time scan of the tree
    which builds the xref list will pre-create entries for every xref handle
    that exists in the data.  On systems where the xref and node handles are
    synonymous there is no phandle property in referenced nodes, and the xref
    list will initialize to an empty state.  In the latter case, we still need
    to be able to associate a device_t with an xref handle, so we create list
    entries on the fly as needed.  Since the node and xref handles are
    synonymous, we have all the info needed to create a list entry at device
    registration time.
The downside to this change is that it basically allows on the fly creation
    of xref handles as synonyms of node handles, and the association of a
    device_t with them.  Whether this is a bug or a feature is in the eye of
    the beholder, I guess.

Modified:
    head/sys/dev/ofw/openfirm.c

Modified: head/sys/dev/ofw/openfirm.c
==============================================================================
--- head/sys/dev/ofw/openfirm.c Sat Sep  6 18:20:50 2014        (r271201)
+++ head/sys/dev/ofw/openfirm.c Sat Sep  6 18:43:17 2014        (r271202)
@@ -62,7 +62,10 @@ __FBSDID("$FreeBSD$");
#include <sys/param.h>
   #include <sys/kernel.h>
+#include <sys/lock.h>
   #include <sys/malloc.h>
+#include <sys/mutex.h>
+#include <sys/queue.h>
   #include <sys/systm.h>
   #include <sys/endian.h>
@@ -92,6 +95,7 @@ struct xrefinfo {
   };
static SLIST_HEAD(, xrefinfo) xreflist = SLIST_HEAD_INITIALIZER(xreflist);
+static struct mtx xreflist_lock;
   static boolean_t xref_init_done;
#define FIND_BY_XREF 0
@@ -138,6 +142,12 @@ static void
   xrefinfo_init(void *unsed)
   {
+ /*
+        * There is no locking during this init because it runs much earlier
+        * than any of the clients/consumers of the xref list data, but we do
+        * initialize the mutex that will be used for access later.
+        */
+       mtx_init(&xreflist_lock, "OF xreflist lock", NULL, MTX_DEF);
        xrefinfo_create(OF_peer(0));
        xref_init_done = true;
   }
@@ -146,17 +156,35 @@ SYSINIT(xrefinfo, SI_SUB_KMEM, SI_ORDER_
   static struct xrefinfo *
   xrefinfo_find(phandle_t phandle, int find_by)
   {
-       struct xrefinfo * xi;
+       struct xrefinfo *rv, *xi;
+ rv = NULL;
+       mtx_lock(&xreflist_lock);
        SLIST_FOREACH(xi, &xreflist, next_entry) {
-               if (find_by == FIND_BY_XREF && phandle == xi->xref)
-                       return (xi);
-               else if (find_by == FIND_BY_NODE && phandle == xi->node)
-                       return (xi);
-               else if (find_by == FIND_BY_DEV && phandle == 
(uintptr_t)xi->dev)
-                       return (xi);
+               if ((find_by == FIND_BY_XREF && phandle == xi->xref) ||
+                   (find_by == FIND_BY_NODE && phandle == xi->node) ||
+                   (find_by == FIND_BY_DEV && phandle == (uintptr_t)xi->dev)) {
+                       rv = xi;
+                       break;
+               }
        }
-       return (NULL);
+       mtx_unlock(&xreflist_lock);
+       return (rv);
+}
+
+static struct xrefinfo *
+xrefinfo_add(phandle_t node, phandle_t xref, device_t dev)
+{
+       struct xrefinfo *xi;
+
+       xi = malloc(sizeof(*xi), M_OFWPROP, M_WAITOK);
+       xi->node = node;
+       xi->xref = xref;
+       xi->dev  = dev;
+       mtx_lock(&xreflist_lock);
+       SLIST_INSERT_HEAD(&xreflist, xi, next_entry);
+       mtx_unlock(&xreflist_lock);
+       return (xi);
   }
/*
@@ -605,10 +633,17 @@ OF_device_register_xref(phandle_t xref,
   {
        struct xrefinfo *xi;
+ /*
+        * If the given xref handle doesn't already exist in the list then we
+        * add a list entry.  In theory this can only happen on a system where
+        * nodes don't contain phandle properties and xref and node handles are
+        * synonymous, so the xref handle is added as the node handle as well.
+        */
        if (xref_init_done) {
                if ((xi = xrefinfo_find(xref, FIND_BY_XREF)) == NULL)
-                       return (ENXIO);
-               xi->dev = dev;
+                       xrefinfo_add(xref, xref, dev);
+               else
+                       xi->dev = dev;
                return (0);
        }
        panic("Attempt to register device before xreflist_init");



_______________________________________________
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to