Re: [PATCH 0/3] gpio/pinctrl: imx: let IOMUX controller know about on-SoC GPIOs

[Shawn Guo <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 02:49:16PM +0300, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> >If I understand it correctly, with the change, most of GPIO client
> >device drivers use the same init level as GPIO driver.  So we are not
> >sure if GPIO driver is ready when client drivers try to request GPIO.
> 
> please give it a test run (with and without DTS gpio-ranges changes,
> or just 2/3 from the series), I've tested on iMX6Q SabreLite, SabreAuto,
> SabreSD and I don't see any regressions or noticeable increase of
> -EPROBE_DEFER hits due to not ready GPIOs.
> 
> >most of GPIO client device drivers use the same init level as GPIO driver.
> 
> IMHO that will be the case, if the change 2/3 from the series is applied.
> 
> Statisticaly most of GPIO consumers should settle on device_initcall or
> module_init level, the latter one is translated to device_initcall if
> a driver is built-in, so the proposed downgrading of GPIO controller
> driver init call level looks to be appropriate.
> 
> However pinctrl/pinmux driver should definitely have higher init level
> priority in comparison to GPIO controller driver, every GPIO consumer
> is a pinctrl/pinmux consumer as well, most of iMX pinctrl/pinmux drivers
> are initialized at arch_initcall level, so there is a plenty of options
> to satisfy (GPIO driver initcall) < (pinmux/pinctrl driver initcall)
> equation:
> * change pinmux/pinctrl driver initcall level to postcore_initcall
>   and GPIO driver initcall level to arch_initcall or lower one,
> * keep pinmux/pinctrl driver at arch_initcall level, set GPIO driver
>   initcall level to any lower than arch_initcall (e.g. device_initcall)
> * keep everything as is, drop 2/3 and rely on -EPROBE_DEFER from
>   GPIO driver probe due to not yet initialized pinctrl driver.
> 
> >It shouldn't be a problem if every client driver handle the failure
> >with deferred probing, but I'm not sure that's the case now.
> >
> 
> From what I see it is the case for the most critical drivers, for the
> rest I believe it is a bug, which can be revealed by shifting GPIO
> driver initcall level and fixed, see also
> 
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/ksummit-discuss/2016-August/003419.html

Okay, fair enough.

For the series,

Acked-by: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
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