[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130423173442.GF10155@atomide.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 10:34:42 -0700
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
Cc: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
"Ben Dooks (embedded platforms)" <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] OMAP: fix boot sequence
* Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com> [130423 06:25]:
> Hi
>
> There are two public discussions now related to OMAP boot and drivers
> initialization issues:
> "Multiple issues with omap4 panda es in linux next"
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg90241.html
> "[BUG] omap: mfd/regulator: twl/core: init order"
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg89980.html
>
> In both cases there are pinctrl-single/I2C/MFD/Regulators initailization issue:
> - regulators are not initialized because of twl,
> - twl is not initialized because of I2C,
> - I2C is not initialized because of pinctrl-single,
> - pinctrl-single is initialized at mudule/device init time.
> So, most everything will be shifted at late_initcall time.
>
> This may cause boot delay (more over, it can broken initialization of drivers
> which are not ready to use deferred probe mechanism yet, for example DSS).
>
> Introduced pathes shift I2C and TWL iniialization to module/device init layer
> instead of subsys init layer where initialization dependencies resolved
> indirectly in drivers/Makefile now.
>
> Grygorii Strashko (2):
> i2c: omap: convert to module_platform_driver()
> mfd: twl-core: convert to module_i2c_driver()
>
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c | 14 +-------------
> drivers/mfd/twl-core.c | 12 +-----------
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
Thanks, I have few questions:
1. It seems that the real fix to the issues we're seeing
is to make the broken drivers to support -EPROBE_DEFER?
2. If so, can these be merged later on as clean-up?
3. Can these two patches be merged separately without
breaking things?
Regards,
Tony
--
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