+Rafael On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 10:39:07AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Mika Westerberg > <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 10:05:26AM -0800, David Cohen wrote: > > >> It looks we have an implicit dependency to GPIO driver in Bay Trail, and > >> having this window until load the module is not acceptable to fulfill > >> this implicit dependency. > > > > It is not implicit at all. > > > > The user of the GPIO in ACPI DSDT table says something like: > > > > Name (_DEP, Package () { \_SB.GPO2 }) > > > > or similar. That is *explicit* dependency. Here \_SB.GPO2 is one of the > > GPIO banks. > > That's very nice for ACPI. But what do you expect the Linux kernel to > do with that? It should prevent the driver from probing until all the devices listed in _DEP have drivers probed. However, it turned out that this is not that straightforward after all :-( For one, it looks like _DEP is used also for non-operation region dependencies. This is not in the ACPI spec but we have seen this in real machines out there. Other thing I heard, is that handling all these dependencies in driver core might be nightmare to maintain. > Basically that is just like getting an -EPROBE_DEFER from the > gpiochip when the gpiod_get() call is issued, and you have to wait > because the gpiochip is not probed yet. We can solve that at runtime > right? Yes we can if the driver core prevents probing the driver. > I had a discussion with Greg the other day that we have no way of > expressing inside the kernel that a resource such as a GPIO, a pin, > a clk or a regulator is used by some module. It's just a synchronous > gpiod_get() or whatever call, then there is a warning if you remove > a gpiochip with gpios still in use. > > What is needed to make use of such a dependency mechanism is > a way to graph the dependencies between kernel drivers and > the resources (gpios, clocks, regulators...) they provide to other > drivers, so this information can be used when probing, removing, > powering up/down the cluster. > > That problem needs to be solved in the device core, until then there > is not way to actually use that ACPI _DEP property for what I can > tell. I agree. > (On a side note: whoever came up with the idea that ACPI props > be 4 characters wide and start with an underscore and this > backslash obfuscation needs to... think differently.) > > Yours, > Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html