On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Dirk Brandewie <dirk.brandewie@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > For the case where both are built-in the load order works my driver uses > device_initcall() and acpi_cpufreq uses late_initcall(). > > For the case where both are a module (which I was sure I tested) you are > right > I will have to do something. > > For now I propose to make my driver built-in only while I sort out the right > solution for the module build. Does this seem reasonable to everyone? Of-course i am missing something here. Why would anybody want to insert acpi-cpufreq module when the system supports the pstate driver. In case they are mutually exclusive, then we can have something like depends on !ACPI-DRIVER in the kconfig option of pstate driver. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
