On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 1:59 AM, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 01:51:02AM +0900, Magnus Damm wrote: > >> I'm not sure if this is i2c specific though - in general you probably >> need to register the parent bus driver first. > > This was my original question - I'm not aware of any reason why you > should need to register the driver for the specific bus first, it seems > odd. Can't see why it wouldn't work - in theory at least. I'll have a look tomorrow. The use of subsys_initcall() in the keypad driver is also a bit odd IMO. >> > In general embedded platforms register I2C early as things like PMICs >> > typically hang off them. Grant was trying to push people to use >> > deferred registration for this stuff but it didn't happen yet and I'd >> > personally be more comfortable with more infastructure supporting that. > >> The dependency tracking is a bit primitive with only initcalls. I >> wouldn't mind something like this: > > That's not a general solution as it doesn't cover things like cross > dependencies between devices on the same bus type. You really want to > be able to say "I depend on this set of other devices" somehow, the > proposal from Grant that I'm talking about was to only register devices > once their dependencies had appeared which solves the issue but is a bit > manual for the board files. Sounds nice. Hopefully that will allow us to use module_init() in drivers instead of other initcall levels depending on bus type. Thanks, / magnus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
