> Doesn't add much to the discussion. In the example I gave, the driver > already does synchronous probing. If the device can't probe > successfully because a supplier isn't ready, it doesn't matter if it's > a synchronous probe. The probe would still be deferred and we'll hit > the same issue. Even in the situation the commit [5] describes, if > parallelized probing is done and the PHY depended on something (say a > clock), you'd still end up not probing the PHY even if the driver is > present and the generic PHY would end up force probing it. genphy is meant to be used when there is no other driver available. It is a best effort, better than nothing, might work. And quite a few boards rely on it. However, it should not be used when there is a specific driver. So if the PHY device has been probed, and -EPROBE_DEFER was returned, we also need to return -EPROBE_DEFER here when deciding if genphy should be used. It should then all unwind and try again later. I don't know the device core, but it looks like dev->can_match tells us what we need to know. If true, we know there is a driver for this device. But i'm hesitant to make use of this outside of driver/base. Andrew
