Re: [GIT PULL] On-demand device probing

From
Andrew F. Davis <hidden>
Date
2015-10-25 19:47:19
Also in
dri-devel, linux-clk, linux-devicetree, linux-gpio, linux-i2c, linux-pm, linux-pwm, linux-tegra, lkml
Reply to
Tim Bird, 2015-10-23
On 10/23/2015 10:45 AM, Tim Bird wrote:
I've been worried about DT overhead adding to boot time for a while.
And IMHO probe deferral is just about the lamest way to solve boot
order dependencies I can imagine, from a computer science perspective.
(Well, there's a certain elegance to it, but it's a stupid "make
everything re-doable, back up and start over, time-wasting" elegance.)
It has a bogosort kind of elegance. :)

Also this might be a silly question (I haven't been following this issue
for very long), but as the only place that can really know what devices
depend on each other, in a generic kernel, is the DT (or whatever
abstraction) will we not eventually need to solve this issue there? Could
we just add a "depends-on = <&phandle>;" to nodes when we know they are
needed for our board?
Thread (101 messages) 101 messages, 22 authors, last reply 2015-10-27
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread / next series-diff position
kprevious message in thread / previous series-diff position
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help