On Tue, 02 Aug 2016 13:47:10 +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 12:47:06PM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote: > > On 08/02/2016 10:36 AM, Thierry Reding wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 01, 2016 at 08:04:55PM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote: > > >> On 08/01/2016 03:59 PM, Jani Nikula wrote: > > >>> Cc Andrzej, Thierry > > >>> > > >>> On Fri, 22 Jul 2016, Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >>>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 04:30:24PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > >>>>> Hi, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> is there any reason drm-mipi-dsi can't be a module? It's fixed as a > > >>>>> built-in since its Kconfig is bool. > > >>>> Probably none except embedded folks eshew modules ;-) Submit patch, I'll > > >>>> apply. > > >>> Possibly this? > > >>> > > >>> postcore_initcall(mipi_dsi_bus_init); > > >> If I remember correctly, the only reason for this is to have mipi_dsi bus > > >> registered before mipi_dsi drivers, which usually are registered > > >> at module initcall. But maybe bus registration can be performed at > > >> first mipi_dsi driver registration. This way we could modularize it. > > > I think it should work fine if this was built as a module. The purpose > > > for having this as postcore_initcall() is simply so that the bus is > > > fully initialized before any driver gets registered with it. If this > > > code is built as a module, symbol dependencies will make sure that the > > > drm_mipi_dsi.ko module will be loaded before any users. > > > > If you change initcall of mipi_dsi to module and then you compile > > it as built-in, only link order will guard correct initialization sequence. > > As for now panels are linked after mipi-dsi, so it should be OK, > > even if little bit hacky. > > I wasn't suggesting that we turn the postcore_initcall() into > module_init(). postcore_initcall() works just fine for modules (it's > automatically replaced by a module_init() if the code is built as a > module) and it will still do the right thing with regard to ordering > when built-in. Right, I already tested the code, just building as a module without any other changes. And it worked. About the rest, what Thierry suggested: > Two things are missing, though: 1) the drm_mipi_dsi.ko module would need > to be reference counted so that the symbols stay around as long as there > are any drivers (this might be covered by symbol dependencies already) Yeah, the symbol dependency should cover it enough. > and 2) there would need to be an exit function for the module to cleanup > the bus. So only this one is missing. I'm going to cook this as well and submit patches later. thanks, Takashi _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
