On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 02:08:06PM +0530, Kumar, Shobhit wrote: > > On 01/20/2016 01:50 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > >On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 09:00:40PM +0530, Kumar, Shobhit wrote: > >>On 01/19/2016 08:45 PM, Shobhit Kumar wrote: > >>>INTEL_SOC_PMIC is loading later than I915 failing the gpiod_get and > >>>pwm_get calls in i915. Add a retry to give time for the INTEL_SOC_PMIC > >>>to load. This was fine till now but broke in latest kernel. Maybe load > >>>time for the INTEL_SOC_PMIC has increased. > >>> > >>>Since the lookup tables for GPIO (panel enable) and PWM both are > >>>exported by same intel_soc_pmic driver, just retrying for the driver to > >>>load in intel_dsi_init is sufficient. By the time we come to > >>>setup_backlight, pwm would have been exported as well. > >> > >>Maybe we should play with initcalls here but I was not sure how it will > >>impact if I change it for PMIC driver. IIRC, this discussion came up from > >>Daniel at the time of original patches also but somehow did not close > >>decidedly and has come back as a regression. > > > >The correct way to handle this is to bail out with -EPROBE_DEFER. This is > >how this is meant to be, no amount of random retrying will fix this > >properly for such dynamic inter-module depencies. > > Yeah, you are right, retries are working pretty randomly. I made a quick > changes all the way up to i915_driver_load returning -EPROBE_DEFER form > intel_setup_outputs and it seems to work. > > > > >And yes this is going to be a world-class test for our module load unwind > >code. > > Well it seems to be working :) Will have a cleaned up patch for review. Also > need to take care of this in the LPSS_PWM patches as well. You're extremely lucky then I'd say. Let's see whether CI agrees and then merge this ;-) Cheers, Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
