Re: [PATCH v2 27/45] mfd: ntxec: Use devm_register_power_handler()

[Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 11/7/21 9:16 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> 07.11.2021 20:08, Guenter Roeck пишет:
> > On 11/7/21 8:53 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> > > 06.11.2021 23:54, Jonathan Neuschäfer пишет:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 12:16:57AM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> > > > > Use devm_register_power_handler() that replaces global pm_power_off
> > > > > variable and allows to register multiple power-off handlers. It also
> > > > > provides restart-handler support, i.e. all in one API.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > ---
> > > > When I boot with (most of) this patchset applied, I get the warning at
> > > > kernel/reboot.c:187:
> > > >
> > > >      /*
> > > >       * Handler must have unique priority. Otherwise call order is
> > > >       * determined by registration order, which is unreliable.
> > > >       */
> > > >      WARN_ON(!atomic_notifier_has_unique_priority(&restart_handler_list,
> > > > nb));
> > > >
> > > > As the NTXEC driver doesn't specify a priority, I think this is an issue
> > > > to be fixed elsewhere.
> > > >
> > > > Other than that, it works and looks good, as far as I can tell.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > For this patch:
> > > >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Jonathan Neuschäfer <j.neuschaefer@xxxxxxx>
> > > > Tested-by: Jonathan Neuschäfer <j.neuschaefer@xxxxxxx>
> > > Thank you. You have conflicting restart handlers, apparently NTXEC
> > > driver should have higher priority than the watchdog driver. It should
> > > be a common problem for the watchdog drivers, I will lower watchdog's
> > > default priority to fix it.
> > The watchdog subsystem already uses "0" as default priority, which was
> > intended as priority of last resort for restart handlers. I do not see
> > a reason to change that.
> Right, I meant that watchdog drivers which use restart handler set the
> level to the default 128 [1]. Although, maybe it's a problem only for
> i.MX drivers in practice, I'll take a closer look at the other drivers.
They don't have to do that. The default is priority 0. It is the decision
of the driver author to set the watchdog's restart priority. So it is wrong
to claim that this would be "a common problem for the watchdog drivers",
because it isn't. Presumably there was a reason for the driver author
to select the default priority of 128. If there is a platform which has
a better means to restart the system, it should select a priority of
129 or higher instead of affecting _all_ platforms using the imx watchdog
to reset the system.

Sure, you can negotiate that with the driver author, but the default should
really be to change the priority for less affected platforms.

Guenter