[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdYV5w6BksUjXvXs=88BovUyXgRt-vXSD0twjRpzbZcvFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 17:38:20 +0100
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Andrew Murray <andrew.murray@....com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/14] ARM: pci: Keep pci_common_init() around after init
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Thierry Reding
<thierry.reding@...onic-design.de> wrote:
> When using deferred driver probing, PCI host controller drivers may
> actually require this function after the init stage.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>
There seem to be a proliferation of these patches now.
Isn't this just papering over the real problem? The discarding
of __init sections need to happen *after* all deferred probes
are complete, lest we have to remove *all* __init sections from
*all* drivers in the kernel, don't we?
Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists