[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130822100008.2669b0d9@armhf>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 10:00:08 +0200
From: Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@...e.fr>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: reduce the number of PROBE_DEFERs
On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 11:13:24 +0100
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@...e.fr> wrote:
> > This patch populates the platform from the device tree into two steps:
> > the first step creates the nodes that are referenced by a phandle,
> > the second step creates the other nodes.
> >
> > This permits to reduce the number of PROBE_DEFERs.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@...e.fr>
> > ---
> > A better way to reduce probe deferral could be sorting the nodes
> > according to their phandle level in the DT blob at compilation time ...
>
> Have you got measurements or statistics that show this making a
> difference? I suspect you'll find for boot time it will have little to
> no affect since the device driver probe order is more closely related
> to the kernel link order than the order that devices were registered.
With the device tree and most drivers as modules, the kernel link order
does not matter.
I admit that the gain may be small: I just get none or just one probe
deferral instead of 3 on my cubox with this patch.
--
Ken ar c'hentaƱ | ** Breizh ha Linux atav! **
Jef | http://moinejf.free.fr/
--
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