lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v1 1/2] pinctrl: tegra: Move drivers registration to arch_init level
On 06.08.2018 15:38, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> On Monday, 6 August 2018 16:03:01 MSK Stefan Agner wrote:
>> On 04.08.2018 16:01, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> > On Friday, 3 August 2018 20:24:56 MSK Linus Walleij wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 1:31 PM Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch> wrote:
>> >> > A while back at least using those init lists were not well received
>> >> > even
>> >> > for GPIO/pinctrl drivers:
>> >> >
>> >> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CACRpkdYk0zW12qNXgOstTLmdVDYacu0Un+8quTN+J
>> >> > _az
>> >> > Oic7AA@mail.gmail.com/T/#mf0596982324a6489b5537b0531ac5aed60a316ba
>> >>
>> >> You shouldn't listen too much to that guy he's not trustworthy.
>>
>> ;-)
>>
>> >> > I still think we should make an exception for GPIO/pinctrl and use
>> >> > earlier initcalls. Platform GPIO/pinctrl drivers provide basic
>> >> > infrastructure often used by many other drivers, we want to have them
>> >> > loaded early. It avoids unnecessary EPROBE_DEFER and hence probably
>> >> > even
>> >> > boots faster.
>> >>
>> >> When we have the pin control and GPIO at different initlevels it makes me
>> >> uneasy because I feel we have implicit init dependencies that seem more
>> >> than a little fragile.
>> >
>> > Yes, it is not very good.
>>
>> Btw, just noticed this now:
>> GPIO driver -> arch_initcall
>> pinctrl driver -> subsys_initcall
>
> I'm not sure what you're talking about, it's the other way around in the
> patches.

Wow, yeah sorry... That must be the heat in our office ':-)

--
Stefan

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-06 23:01    [W:0.065 / U:1.336 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site