[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160104171257.GO16023@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 17:12:57 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@...omium.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
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 Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 06:29:15PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com> wrote:
> > I think what Mark means is, that we define some pinctrl_initcall which
> > is a macro to subsys_initcall (or arch_initcall or similar). We apply this
> > to all pinctrl drivers including the one from Mediatek. This way at least
> > we have a common method and changing the behaviour in the future is
> > easier to handle.
> That would be pinctrl_soc_initcall() in that case. Just pinctrl_initcall()
> would assume it's for all drivers and there is a bunch of them that are just
> fine with simple device_initcall()s.
OTOH it might be easier to just have an initcall (or fiddle with the
link order) for everything to avoid having to think about which drivers
things apply to.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists