| Message ID | 20211004034430.41355-7-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | efi_loader: more tightly integrate UEFI disks to device model | expand |
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 12:44:14PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > Every time a sata bus/port is scanned and a new device is detected, > we want to call device_probe() as it will give us a chance to run additional > post-processings for some purposes. > > In particular, support for creating partitions on a device will be added. > > Signed-off-by: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org> > --- > drivers/ata/dwc_ahsata.c | 10 ++++++++++ > drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c | 11 +++++++++++ > drivers/ata/sata_mv.c | 9 +++++++++ > drivers/ata/sata_sil.c | 12 ++++++++++++ > 4 files changed, 42 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/dwc_ahsata.c b/drivers/ata/dwc_ahsata.c > index 6d42548087b3..6a51c70d1170 100644 > --- a/drivers/ata/dwc_ahsata.c > +++ b/drivers/ata/dwc_ahsata.c > @@ -1026,6 +1026,16 @@ int dwc_ahsata_scan(struct udevice *dev) > return ret; > } > > + ret = device_probe(bdev); > + if (ret < 0) { > + debug("Can't probe\n"); > + /* TODO: undo create */ > + > + device_unbind(bdev); > + > + return ret; > + } > + Patches 2-6 seem to do the same thing for different subsystems. I think creating a function for that would make it easier. > return 0; > } > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c b/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c > index e44db0a37458..346e9298b4c5 100644 > --- a/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c > +++ b/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c > @@ -982,6 +982,17 @@ static int fsl_ata_probe(struct udevice *dev) > failed_number++; > continue; > } > + > + ret = device_probe(bdev); > + if (ret < 0) { > + debug("Can't probe\n"); > + ret = fsl_unbind_device(blk); Apart from this exception I guess > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + > + failed_number++; > + continue; > + } > } > > if (failed_number == nr_ports) > diff --git a/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c b/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c > index 003222d47be6..09b735779ebf 100644 > --- a/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c > +++ b/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c > @@ -1099,6 +1099,15 @@ static int sata_mv_probe(struct udevice *dev) > continue; > } > > + ret = device_probe(bdev); > + if (ret < 0) { > + debug("Can't probe\n"); > + /* TODO: undo create */ > + > + device_unbind(bdev); > + continue; > + } > + > /* If we got here, the current SATA port was probed > * successfully, so set the probe status to successful. > */ > diff --git a/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c b/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c > index dda712f42cb2..295f7ca72303 100644 > --- a/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c > +++ b/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c > @@ -864,6 +864,18 @@ static int sil_pci_probe(struct udevice *dev) > failed_number++; > continue; > } > + > + ret = device_probe(bdev); > + if (ret < 0) { > + debug("Can't probe\n"); > + ret = sil_unbind_device(blk); > + device_unbind(bdev); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + > + failed_number++; > + continue; > + } > } > > if (failed_number == sata_info.maxport) > -- > 2.33.0 >
On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 09:45:35PM +0300, Ilias Apalodimas wrote: > On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 12:44:14PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > Every time a sata bus/port is scanned and a new device is detected, > > we want to call device_probe() as it will give us a chance to run additional > > post-processings for some purposes. > > > > In particular, support for creating partitions on a device will be added. > > > > Signed-off-by: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org> > > --- > > drivers/ata/dwc_ahsata.c | 10 ++++++++++ > > drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c | 11 +++++++++++ > > drivers/ata/sata_mv.c | 9 +++++++++ > > drivers/ata/sata_sil.c | 12 ++++++++++++ > > 4 files changed, 42 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/dwc_ahsata.c b/drivers/ata/dwc_ahsata.c > > index 6d42548087b3..6a51c70d1170 100644 > > --- a/drivers/ata/dwc_ahsata.c > > +++ b/drivers/ata/dwc_ahsata.c > > @@ -1026,6 +1026,16 @@ int dwc_ahsata_scan(struct udevice *dev) > > return ret; > > } > > > > + ret = device_probe(bdev); > > + if (ret < 0) { > > + debug("Can't probe\n"); > > + /* TODO: undo create */ > > + > > + device_unbind(bdev); > > + > > + return ret; > > + } > > + > > Patches 2-6 seem to do the same thing for different subsystems. I think > creating a function for that would make it easier. Well, the reason why I put those changes in separate commits is - first, different subsystems are owned by different maintainers, and - more importantly, different subsystems may have different cleanup processing required. There are always extra setups after blk_create_device(), which should be reverted if device_probe() fails. For instance, sil_unbind_device() and fsl_unbind_device(). So I would like to leave subsystem owners responsible for that. -Takahiro Akashi > > return 0; > > } > > > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c b/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c > > index e44db0a37458..346e9298b4c5 100644 > > --- a/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c > > +++ b/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c > > @@ -982,6 +982,17 @@ static int fsl_ata_probe(struct udevice *dev) > > failed_number++; > > continue; > > } > > + > > + ret = device_probe(bdev); > > + if (ret < 0) { > > + debug("Can't probe\n"); > > + ret = fsl_unbind_device(blk); > > Apart from this exception I guess > > > + if (ret) > > + return ret; > > + > > + failed_number++; > > + continue; > > + } > > } > > > > if (failed_number == nr_ports) > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c b/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c > > index 003222d47be6..09b735779ebf 100644 > > --- a/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c > > +++ b/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c > > @@ -1099,6 +1099,15 @@ static int sata_mv_probe(struct udevice *dev) > > continue; > > } > > > > + ret = device_probe(bdev); > > + if (ret < 0) { > > + debug("Can't probe\n"); > > + /* TODO: undo create */ > > + > > + device_unbind(bdev); > > + continue; > > + } > > + > > /* If we got here, the current SATA port was probed > > * successfully, so set the probe status to successful. > > */ > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c b/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c > > index dda712f42cb2..295f7ca72303 100644 > > --- a/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c > > +++ b/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c > > @@ -864,6 +864,18 @@ static int sil_pci_probe(struct udevice *dev) > > failed_number++; > > continue; > > } > > + > > + ret = device_probe(bdev); > > + if (ret < 0) { > > + debug("Can't probe\n"); > > + ret = sil_unbind_device(blk); > > + device_unbind(bdev); > > + if (ret) > > + return ret; > > + > > + failed_number++; > > + continue; > > + } > > } > > > > if (failed_number == sata_info.maxport) > > -- > > 2.33.0 > >
[...] > > > + ret = device_probe(bdev); > > > + if (ret < 0) { > > > + debug("Can't probe\n"); > > > + /* TODO: undo create */ > > > + > > > + device_unbind(bdev); > > > + > > > + return ret; > > > + } > > > + > > > > Patches 2-6 seem to do the same thing for different subsystems. I think > > creating a function for that would make it easier. > > Well, the reason why I put those changes in separate commits is > - first, different subsystems are owned by different maintainers, and > - more importantly, different subsystems may have different cleanup > processing required. That also stands if you create a common function doesn't it? Create a function that fits most, add the calls in separate patches so subsystems maintainers can have a look. If one of the implementation special, it can ignore the wrapper and go do it's own thing. > There are always extra setups after blk_create_device(), which should > be reverted if device_probe() fails. For instance, sil_unbind_device() > and fsl_unbind_device(). > So I would like to leave subsystem owners responsible for that. Regards /Ilias > > -Takahiro Akashi > > > > > return 0; > > > } > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c b/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c > > > index e44db0a37458..346e9298b4c5 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c > > > +++ b/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c > > > @@ -982,6 +982,17 @@ static int fsl_ata_probe(struct udevice *dev) > > > failed_number++; > > > continue; > > > } > > > + > > > + ret = device_probe(bdev); > > > + if (ret < 0) { > > > + debug("Can't probe\n"); > > > + ret = fsl_unbind_device(blk); > > > > Apart from this exception I guess > > > > > + if (ret) > > > + return ret; > > > + > > > + failed_number++; > > > + continue; > > > + } > > > } > > > > > > if (failed_number == nr_ports) > > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c b/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c > > > index 003222d47be6..09b735779ebf 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c > > > +++ b/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c > > > @@ -1099,6 +1099,15 @@ static int sata_mv_probe(struct udevice *dev) > > > continue; > > > } > > > > > > + ret = device_probe(bdev); > > > + if (ret < 0) { > > > + debug("Can't probe\n"); > > > + /* TODO: undo create */ > > > + > > > + device_unbind(bdev); > > > + continue; > > > + } > > > + > > > /* If we got here, the current SATA port was probed > > > * successfully, so set the probe status to successful. > > > */ > > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c b/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c > > > index dda712f42cb2..295f7ca72303 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c > > > +++ b/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c > > > @@ -864,6 +864,18 @@ static int sil_pci_probe(struct udevice *dev) > > > failed_number++; > > > continue; > > > } > > > + > > > + ret = device_probe(bdev); > > > + if (ret < 0) { > > > + debug("Can't probe\n"); > > > + ret = sil_unbind_device(blk); > > > + device_unbind(bdev); > > > + if (ret) > > > + return ret; > > > + > > > + failed_number++; > > > + continue; > > > + } > > > } > > > > > > if (failed_number == sata_info.maxport) > > > -- > > > 2.33.0 > > >
diff --git a/drivers/ata/dwc_ahsata.c b/drivers/ata/dwc_ahsata.c index 6d42548087b3..6a51c70d1170 100644 --- a/drivers/ata/dwc_ahsata.c +++ b/drivers/ata/dwc_ahsata.c @@ -1026,6 +1026,16 @@ int dwc_ahsata_scan(struct udevice *dev) return ret; } + ret = device_probe(bdev); + if (ret < 0) { + debug("Can't probe\n"); + /* TODO: undo create */ + + device_unbind(bdev); + + return ret; + } + return 0; } diff --git a/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c b/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c index e44db0a37458..346e9298b4c5 100644 --- a/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c +++ b/drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c @@ -982,6 +982,17 @@ static int fsl_ata_probe(struct udevice *dev) failed_number++; continue; } + + ret = device_probe(bdev); + if (ret < 0) { + debug("Can't probe\n"); + ret = fsl_unbind_device(blk); + if (ret) + return ret; + + failed_number++; + continue; + } } if (failed_number == nr_ports) diff --git a/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c b/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c index 003222d47be6..09b735779ebf 100644 --- a/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c +++ b/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c @@ -1099,6 +1099,15 @@ static int sata_mv_probe(struct udevice *dev) continue; } + ret = device_probe(bdev); + if (ret < 0) { + debug("Can't probe\n"); + /* TODO: undo create */ + + device_unbind(bdev); + continue; + } + /* If we got here, the current SATA port was probed * successfully, so set the probe status to successful. */ diff --git a/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c b/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c index dda712f42cb2..295f7ca72303 100644 --- a/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c +++ b/drivers/ata/sata_sil.c @@ -864,6 +864,18 @@ static int sil_pci_probe(struct udevice *dev) failed_number++; continue; } + + ret = device_probe(bdev); + if (ret < 0) { + debug("Can't probe\n"); + ret = sil_unbind_device(blk); + device_unbind(bdev); + if (ret) + return ret; + + failed_number++; + continue; + } } if (failed_number == sata_info.maxport)
Every time a sata bus/port is scanned and a new device is detected, we want to call device_probe() as it will give us a chance to run additional post-processings for some purposes. In particular, support for creating partitions on a device will be added. Signed-off-by: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org> --- drivers/ata/dwc_ahsata.c | 10 ++++++++++ drivers/ata/fsl_sata.c | 11 +++++++++++ drivers/ata/sata_mv.c | 9 +++++++++ drivers/ata/sata_sil.c | 12 ++++++++++++ 4 files changed, 42 insertions(+) -- 2.33.0