[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdb4CCNYtMpPOAB6hF8gSCHa4NtpO8TzH0pVEuh-Spe44w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 10:09:33 +0200
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Anson Huang <anson.huang@....com>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
Peter Chen <peter.chen@....com>,
"oleksandr.suvorov@...adex.com" <oleksandr.suvorov@...adex.com>,
Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>,
Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>,
Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@...all.nl>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@...com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>, Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak@...sk>,
Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@...il.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Leo Li <leoyang.li@....com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
"michael@...le.cc" <michael@...le.cc>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/4] gpio: mxc: Support module build
On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 1:57 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> Overall, my feeling is that making sure all drivers that depend on the pinctrl
> driver can deal with deferred probing is a prerequisite before this can be
> made a loadable module itself (same for clk, irqchip, etc drivers that others
> may rely on).
>
> I understand that your primary motivation is to fit into Google's GKI framework,
> but I think that doing the conversion only partially would neither serve to
> improve the kernel nor actually meet the GKI requirements.
This has been my worry as well when it comes to these GKI-initiated
patches that are flying right now.
> Most pinctrl drivers are currently always built-in to work around the
> load order dependencies. This of course is a bit of a hack and we'd be
> better off if all drivers managed to avoid the dependencies, but this
> can also require a lot of work.
Several people have argued that it is reasonable to cut corners to
achieve the "greater good" of GKI.
I try to handle it on a "does the kernel look better after than
before" basis, while pushing gently for at least trying to
properly modularize the whole thing. It can become pretty hard
to test I think. If it is things like GPIO expanders on I2C
that can be used by several SoCs I would be more hard on
this, on a single SoC not as much.
One discussion thread got inflamed because of ARM vs x86
discussions "x86 is better modularized" which is something I want
to avoid, it is easy to be modularized when your irqs, clocks,
regulators and pins are handled by the BIOS. This is a SoC
problem and x86 SoCs with no BIOS, RISCV, ARM and whatever
doesn't have a fix-it-all-BIOS have this problem. :/
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists