Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] dt: dependencies (for deterministic driver initialization order based on the DT)
From: Alexander Holler <hidden>
Date: 2014-08-28 06:51:12
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, lkml
From: Alexander Holler <hidden>
Date: 2014-08-28 06:51:12
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, lkml
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