On 10.03.2023 15:23, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> On 08/03/2023 21:40, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> The interconnect driver is (or soon will be) vital to many other
>> devices, as it's not a given that the bootloader will set up enough
>> bandwidth for us or that the values we come into are reasonable.
>>
>> Promote the driver to core_initcall to ensure the consumers (i.e.
>> most "meaningful" parts of the SoC) can probe without deferrals.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/interconnect/qcom/msm8996.c | 12 +++++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/interconnect/qcom/msm8996.c b/drivers/interconnect/qcom/msm8996.c
>> index 347fe59ec293..1eb51ed18b0b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/interconnect/qcom/msm8996.c
>> +++ b/drivers/interconnect/qcom/msm8996.c
>> @@ -2109,7 +2109,17 @@ static struct platform_driver qnoc_driver = {
>> .sync_state = icc_sync_state,
>> }
>> };
>> -module_platform_driver(qnoc_driver);
>> +static int __init qnoc_driver_init(void)
>> +{
>> + return platform_driver_register(&qnoc_driver);
>> +}
>> +core_initcall(qnoc_driver_init);
>> +
>> +static void __exit qnoc_driver_exit(void)
>> +{
>> + platform_driver_unregister(&qnoc_driver);
>> +}
>> +module_exit(qnoc_driver_exit);
>> MODULE_AUTHOR("Yassine Oudjana <y.oudjana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>");
>> MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Qualcomm MSM8996 NoC driver");
>>
>
> Its probably the right-thing-to-do to have interconnects probe earlier but, then, why restrict that to 8996 only ?
To be honest with you, this one caught my attention and it was the
one I tested things on.. But yeah, they should all be probing ASAP.
Konrad
>
> ---
> bod
