Re: [PATCH 2/5] i2c: sh_mobile: add DMA support

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thursday 11 December 2014 22:47:32 Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > > Note that the I2C drives uses subsys_initcall() for historic reasons,
> > > while the DMA driver uses module_init(). This is hard to revert without
> > > introducing potential regressions on older boards. So, the I2C DMA
> > > support needs to handle deferred probe definately. I am with Laurent, I
> > > don't see any other way, but I'd be glad to be enlightened...
> > 
> > While I believe that requesting the channel at transfer time is the good
> > solution, I think we should still try to move to module initcalls where
> > possible. The risk of regressions is real so proper testing is needed. My
> > question is, have you tried it ?
> 
> I would need to test all boards using this driver to not fail booting.
> Usually I2C drivers are moved to subsys_initcall because they need
> access to something critical (PMIC, GPIOs...) early. I don't see a sane
> way to do that testing.

Still, I would like to get a better view on the problems we should expect, by 
testing this on the latest boards for instance.

> Other than that, even if we move to module_init, we reduce the chance of
> getting a deferred probe, but we do not eliminate it...

Sure, but reducing the chance of deferred probe is a good idea in my opinion 
:-)

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dmaengine" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux ARM (vger)]     [Linux ARM MSM]     [Linux Omap]     [Linux Arm]     [Linux Tegra]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Samsung SOC]     [eCos]     [Linux PCI]     [Linux Fastboot]     [Gcc Help]     [Git]     [DCCP]     [IETF Announce]     [Security]     [Linux MIPS]     [Yosemite Campsites]

  Powered by Linux