[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151230172212.GZ16023@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 17:22:12 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@...omium.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Yingjoe Chen <yingjoe.chen@...iatek.com>,
Hongzhou Yang <hongzhou.yang@...iatek.com>,
Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@...escale.com>,
Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>,
Maoguang Meng <maoguang.meng@...iatek.com>,
Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>,
"open list:PIN CONTROL SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support"
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: mediatek: convert to arch_initcall
On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 04:11:47PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@...omium.org> wrote:
> > Move pinctrl initialization earlier in boot so that real devices can find
> > their pctldev without probe deferring.
> (...)
> > -module_init(mtk_pinctrl_init);
> > +arch_initcall(mtk_pinctrl_init);
> So I see why you're doing this (because of wanting to avoid nasty boot
> probe deferrals, right?) and I'm going to apply it, because the work
> with probe ordering is still in the works, but I'd like some general
> ARM people to come in with opinions.
I really don't think we should be applying this sort of stuff unless
things are actively broken right now. It's a bit of a rabbit hole we
could spend a long time going down tweaking things for different
systems in the same way that tweaking the link order can be and it masks
the underlying issues.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists