[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130930101500.GA3222@katana>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 12:15:00 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
To: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Fabio Porcedda <fabio.porcedda@...il.com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Libo Chen <libo.chen@...wei.com>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
patches@...aro.org, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] driver core: introduce helper macro initcall_driver()
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 01:13:52PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> For some devices especially on platform/I2C/SPI bus, they want to
> be initialized earlier than other devices, so the driver use initcall
> such as subsys_initcall to make this device initialize earlier.
And this is something we want to get rid of in favor of deferred
probing.
>
> But for those drivers, lots of them just do nothing special in
> xxx_initcall/exit, so introduce a helper macro initcall_driver() to
> eliminate lots of boilerplate just like module_driver() did.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>
So, NACK because using some *_initcall in drivers should not be
encouraged.
Thanks,
Wolfram
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists