# Re: \[GIT PULL\] On-demand device probing

- From: Mark Brown \<broonie@kernel.org\>
- Date: 2015-10-18 19:42:34 
- List: linux-fbdev
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-fbdev/2015/10/4601079
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-clk/2015/10/4597241/t.md

```text
On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 08:47:09AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 10:04:55AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:

> > I think Linus W, Mark B, and I all said a similar thing initially in
> > that dependencies should be handled in the driver core. We went down
> > the path of making this not firmware (aka bus) specific and an earlier
> > version had just that (with fwnode_* calls). That turned out to be
> > pointless as the calling locations were almost always in DT specific
> > code anyway. If you notice, the calls are next to other DT specific
> > calls generally (usually a "get"). So yes, I'd prefer not to have to
> > touch every subsystem, but we had to do that anyway to add DT support.

> If they are "next" to a call like that, why not put it in that call?  I
> really object to having to "sprinkle" this all over the kernel, for no
> obvious reason why that is happening at all (look at the USB patch for
> one such example.)

I did ask that question myself IIRC - we could probably get a long way
by trying to instantiate anything that looks probable when we do a
phandle lookup on it.
```

## Attachments

- [signature.asc](https://ratatoskr.run/linux-fbdev/2015/10/4601079/attachment/0) (application/pgp-signature, 473 bytes)