Re: [RFC PATCH] pinctrl: pinctrl-single.c: init pinctrl single at arch_initcall time

[Tony Lindgren]

* He YunLei <heyunlei@xxxxxxxxxx> [141011 02:03]:
> On 2014/10/9 2:10, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >* He YunLei <heyunlei@xxxxxxxxxx> [141007 18:43]:
> >>
> >>Thanks for your review and I am really appreciated it, but in our arm
> >>platform, we haven't custom initcall levels for other drivers. Although
> >>deferred probe helps other drivers to register well, we are also confused
> >>for the issues of lots of pin request errors debug output while booting the
> >>kernel. Besides, if the number is bigger than the limited number, whether
> >>deferred probe can solve this problem.
> >
> >OK. Care to provide some examples where this happens on your
> >platform?
> >
> >Note that we already have pinctrl very early in drivers/Makefile.
> >What are the early users for pinctrl-single in your setup?
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Tony
> >
> >.
> >
> In our platform we use subsys_initcall in I2C, and fs_initcall in PMIC, Both
> of them are early than pinctrl-single. Although they register well
> with the aid of deferred probe, it's really confused us that pins request
> deferred. Why can't we setup pinctrl-single earlier to reduce these
> messages.

How about make the I2C controller just regular module_init?

We're planning to do that for omaps as soon as we have made omap3
DT only as we still have some board-*.c files.

Presumably your PMIC is also on I2C and you need the PMIC for
regulators?

In that case you can just make the PMICinit normal module_init too.

Regards,

Tony
--
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/