Re: [Update][RFC/RFT][PATCH v3 2/5] driver core: Functional dependencies tracking support

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Lukas Wunner <lukas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 01:52:48PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Lukas Wunner <lukas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 02:33:55PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> >> +void device_links_unbind_consumers(struct device *dev)
>> >> +{
>> >> +     struct device_link *link;
>> >> +     int idx;
>> >> +
>> >> + start:
>> >> +     idx = device_links_read_lock();
>> >> +
>> >> +     list_for_each_entry_rcu(link, &dev->links_to_consumers, s_node) {
>> >> +             enum device_link_status status;
>> >> +
>> >> +             if (link->flags & DEVICE_LINK_STATELESS)
>> >> +                     continue;
>> >> +
>> >> +             spin_lock(&link->lock);
>> >> +             status = link->status;
>> >> +             if (status == DEVICE_LINK_CONSUMER_PROBE) {
>> >> +                     spin_unlock(&link->lock);
>> >> +
>> >> +                     device_links_read_unlock(idx);
>> >> +
>> >> +                     wait_for_device_probe();
>> >> +                     goto start;
>> >> +             }
>> >> +             link->status = DEVICE_LINK_SUPPLIER_UNBIND;
>> >
>> > While revisiting this function it just occurred to me that there's
>> > a theoretical infinite loop here if the consumer probes, is unbound
>> > by the supplier, then reprobes again before the supplier had a chance
>> > to update the link to DEVICE_LINK_SUPPLIER_UNBIND.  Perhaps this isn't
>> > a problem in practice, but noting anyway.
>>
>> But the consumer is unbound only after setting the link status to
>> DEVICE_LINK_SUPPLIER_UNBIND and then it won't probe again.
>
> Sorry, looking at the code with a fresh pair of eyeballs I realize the
> scenario for the infinite loop is different from what I've written above:
> The infinite loop can occur if the consumer probes continuously but never
> succeeds, e.g. due to some unfulfilled condition in its ->probe hook.

I'm not sure how that can happen.

If it doesn't succeed, the driver's ->probe() will return an error, so
that driver is not going to be tried again, unless the error is
-EPROBE_DEFER, but that will cause it to wait for another driver to
probe successfully in the meantime.

Or do you have any particular example in which things work differently in mind?

Thanks,
Rafael