Hello Huacai, On 5/21/22 11:13, Huacai Chen wrote: > Hi, Javier, > > On Sat, May 21, 2022 at 5:06 PM Javier Martinez Canillas > <javierm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hello Huacai, >> >> On 5/21/22 09:37, Huacai Chen wrote: >> >> [snip] >> >>>> >>>> A problem with moving to subsys_initcall_sync() is that this will delay >>>> more when a display is available in the system, and just to cope up with >>>> a corner case (as mentioned the common case is native drivers as module). >>> OK, your method seems better, but I think moving to >>> subsys_initcall_sync() can make the screen display as early as >>> possible. >>> >> >> But it doesn't cover all cases. For example, you will get the same error >> if for example your native driver is built-in and efifb built as module. >> >> So my opinion is that instead of playing with the init call levels, is >> just better for you to build your native driver as a module instead of >> making it built-in. > I mean moving to subsys_initcall_sync() on top of your patchset, not > replacing them (Just for display earlier). > Ah, I see what you mean. Yes, that makes sense indeed. Feel free to post a patch proposing that. If you do, please also include Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@xxxxxxx> to the Cc list. Thanks! -- Best regards, Javier Martinez Canillas Linux Engineering Red Hat
