Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] dt: dependencies (for deterministic driver initialization order based on the DT)

[Alexander Holler]

Am 27.08.2014 18:37, schrieb Stephen Warren:

> Of course, there are probably cases where we could/should add some more
> phandles/... and likewise cases where we shouldn't. That's why detailed
> research is needed.

Just because I'm curious, I wonder how this research does or shoud look 
like.

Defered probes did come to light with 3.4, that was more than 2 years 
ago. Ok, most people (like me) just noticed it during the last months 
when they switched to DT and have run into a problem (the deferred probe 
mechanism is an error-message killer), but some must have seen it 
already 2 years ago.

And I wonder how the ACPI world solves that problem. My guess would be 
hardcoded stuff in the firmware-blob (BIOS), just like it happened with 
board files, but I've never seen BIOS code and my knowledge about ACPI 
is almost zero. ;)

Regards,

Alexander Holler
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/