Hi Daniel, On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 6:26 PM Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 29/08/2018 17:44, Chris Brandt wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 29, 2018 1, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > >> Can the boot constraints [1] solve this issue instead of the changes you > >> are proposing ? > >> > >> [1] https://lwn.net/Articles/747250/ > > > > Thanks for the suggestion, but... > > > > I grepped for "boot_constraint" and it shows up nowhere in the current > > kernel. > > > > Also, this article was written Feb 16, 2018, and I can see that the > > patch series was still being submitted (V7) as of Feb 23, 2018. > > Ah ok, fair enough, I thought it was merged. In any case, after thinking > about it, it wouldn't have helped. > > My concern is if we can avoid changing the TIMER_OF_DECLARE because of > the boot order, it would be better. > > Can returning EPROBE_DEFER fix this issue? Or use the 'complex > dependencies' [1]? *_OF_DECLARE() is not compatible with EPROBE_DEFER, which causes issues with complex dependencies. That's exactly why many subsystems are moving away from it. E.g. IOMMU_OF_DECLARE was removed in v4.19-rc1. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
