LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
To: Rajat Jain <rajatxjain@gmail.com>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@google.com>,
	Rajat Jain <rajatja@google.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Thinh Nguyen <Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com>,
	Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	Chris Chiu <chris.chiu@canonical.com>,
	linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	levinale@google.com, bleung@google.com, jsbarnes@google.com,
	pmalani@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] usb: hub: Mark devices downstream a removable hub, as removable
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2021 12:08:19 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211006160819.GA659483@rowland.harvard.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA93t1qzJuN8M2zbs+Kt9JXWP1H2kjKSxBp8-TXEfaMeZ1iggQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 04:43:33PM -0700, Rajat Jain wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 12:59 PM Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 05, 2021 at 09:51:02AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > Hi Alan,
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 7:56 AM Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > As I understand it, the "removable" property refers specifically to
> > > > the device's upstream link, not to whether _any_ of the links leading
> > > > from the device to the computer could be removed.
> > >
> > > No, that is not what it means. I'll cite our sysfs ABI:
> > >
> > > What:           /sys/devices/.../removable
> > > Date:           May 2021
> > > Contact:        Rajat Jain <rajatxjain@gmail.com>
> > > Description:
> > >                 Information about whether a given device can be removed from the
> > >                 platform by the user. This is determined by its subsystem in a
> > >                 bus / platform-specific way. This attribute is only present for
> > >                 devices that can support determining such information:
> > >
> > >                 "removable": device can be removed from the platform by the user
> > >                 "fixed":     device is fixed to the platform / cannot be removed
> > >                              by the user.
> > >                 "unknown":   The information is unavailable / cannot be deduced.
> > >
> > >                 Currently this is only supported by USB (which infers the
> > >                 information from a combination of hub descriptor bits and
> > >                 platform-specific data such as ACPI) and PCI (which gets this
> > >                 from ACPI / device tree).
> > >
> > > It specifically talks about _platform_, not about properties of some
> > > peripheral attached to a system. Note that the wording is very similar
> > > to what we had for USB devices that originally implemented "removable"
> > > attribute:
> >
> > In that case, shouldn't Rajat's patch change go into the driver core
> > rather than the hub driver?  _Every_ device downstream from a
> > removable link should count as removable, yes?  Not just the USB
> > devices.
> 
> I have no preference either way, and can do that if that is more acceptable.
> 
> >
> > And to say that the attribute is supported only by USB and PCI is
> > misleading, since it applies to every device downstream from a
> > removable link.
> 
> However I do think it makes sense to have the bus control whether this
> attribute applies to it or not.

The sysfs ABI quoted by Dmitry above is a little vague.  It seems to 
say that only certain buses can determine whether a device is 
removable, but this simply isn't true, because any device downstream 
from something removable will itself be removable, no matter what kind 
of bus it's on.

>  Determining the first point in a
> hierarchy of devices, where a device can be removed is highly bus
> specific (set_usb_port_removable()).

Yes, the bus must be at least partially responsible for _determining_ 
the value of the removable attribute.  But the attribute should _apply_ 
to all devices, regardless of what bus they are on.

To be more precise, the bus can determine whether a device's upstream 
link (the first link in the chain leading from the device back to the 
CPU) can be hot-unplugged.  The device is removable if any of the links 
in that chain are hot-unpluggable.

> AFAIK, the primary reason / use of this attribute was to distinguish
> devices that can be removed by the user, and really all such devices
> (at least the ones that matter to user) today sit either on PCI or USB
> bus. We intend to use this attribute to segregate internal devices
> from external devices, and collect some statistics about usb device
> usage this way. There is also a VM case that I think Dmitry or Benson
> on this thread can elaborate more about. There seem to be hundreds of
> other bus types and I'm not sure if we want to unnecessarily flood the
> sysfs with a removable attribute under each device.

sysfs already contains a lot of mostly unused information.  I don't 
think adding one or two more will hurt much.

Alan Stern

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-10-06 16:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-29 22:48 [PATCH 1/2] usb: hub: Mark root hubs on removable devices, " Rajat Jain
2021-09-29 22:48 ` [PATCH 2/2] usb: hub: Mark devices downstream a removable hub, " Rajat Jain
2021-09-30  5:31   ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-10-04 22:42     ` Rajat Jain
2021-10-05 14:56       ` Alan Stern
2021-10-05 16:51         ` Dmitry Torokhov
2021-10-05 19:59           ` Alan Stern
2021-10-05 23:43             ` Rajat Jain
2021-10-06  0:41               ` Andrew Lunn
2021-10-06 16:08               ` Alan Stern [this message]
2021-10-06  9:37             ` Oliver Neukum
2021-10-06 16:10               ` Alan Stern
2021-10-06 18:36                 ` Oliver Neukum
2021-09-30  5:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] usb: hub: Mark root hubs on removable devices, " Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-10-04 21:51   ` Rajat Jain
2021-09-30  8:02 ` Oliver Neukum
2021-10-04 21:56   ` Rajat Jain
2021-10-05 11:19 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-10-05 23:49   ` Rajat Jain

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20211006160819.GA659483@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --to=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --cc=Thinh.Nguyen@synopsys.com \
    --cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
    --cc=bleung@google.com \
    --cc=chris.chiu@canonical.com \
    --cc=dtor@google.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jsbarnes@google.com \
    --cc=levinale@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=pmalani@google.com \
    --cc=rajatja@google.com \
    --cc=rajatxjain@gmail.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 2/2] usb: hub: Mark devices downstream a removable hub, as removable' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).