Re: [PATCH 1/5] pinctrl: core: Use delayed work for hogs

[Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 8:19 PM, Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Below is an experimental fix to intorduce pinctrl_start() that I've
> tested with pinctrl-single. Then we should probably make all pin controller
> drivers call pinctrl_start() to properly fix the issue of struct pinctrl_dev
> handle not being initialized before driver functions are called.

Hm I guess that could work, but can we keep pinctrl_register() with the old
semantics and add a separate pinctrl_register_and_defer()
for those who just wanna start it later by a separate call?

Then we don't need any special flags.

> Or do you guys have any better ideas?

Not really. So you mean revert the previous patch and apply something
like this instead?

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