On 19-07-08 09:53, Rene Herman wrote:
quoted text
> On 19-07-08 00:16, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> 
>> +static void __init do_initcalls(void)
>> +{
>> +    initcall_t *call;
>> +    static DECLARE_WORK(async_work, do_async_initcalls);
>> +    int phase = 0; /* 0 = levels 0 - 6, 1 = level 6a, 2 = after level 
>> 6a */
>> +
>> +    async_init_wq = create_singlethread_workqueue("kasyncinit");
>> +
>> +    for (call = __initcall_start; call < __initcall_end; call++) {
>> +        if (phase == 0 && call >= __async_initcall_start) {
>> +            phase = 1;
>> +            queue_work(async_init_wq, &async_work);
>> +        }
>> +        if (phase == 1 && call >= __async_initcall_end)
>> +            phase = 2;
>> +        if (phase != 1)
>> +            do_one_initcall(*call);
>> +    }
> 
> I'm not sure about this comment, being not very sure about the semantics 
> of late_initcall but shouldn't late_initcall (level 7) wait for 6s to 
> have completed?

Following up on this myself -- see for example kernel/power/disk.c: 
power_suspend(). It's a late intitcall so that, as it comments, "all 
devices are discovered and initialized". However, your first followup 
patch makes the USB HCI init async meaning that any USB storage device 
might not be ready yet when it runs, no?

Rene.

--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/