Re: Best practice device tree design for display subsystems/DRM

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

 



On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 12:54:41PM -0600, Daniel Drake wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 12:43 PM, Russell King <rmk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I will point out that relying on driver probing orders has already been
> > stated by driver model people to be unsafe.  This is why I will not
> > adopt such a solution for my driver; it is a bad design.
> 
> Just to clarify, what you're objecting to is effectively the
> following? Because it is not guaranteed in the future that the probe
> order will be the same as the platform_driver_register() calls?

Correct.  Consider what happens if the devices are registered after
the driver(s) have been registered, which may not be in the correct
order.

-- 
Russell King
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel




[Index of Archives]     [Linux DRI Users]     [Linux Intel Graphics]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]
  Powered by Linux