Hi Shiraz, On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:57:19AM +0530, Shiraz Hashim wrote: > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 01:14:41PM +0800, Baruch Siach wrote: > > Hi Pratyush Anand, > > > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:28:07AM +0530, Pratyush Anand wrote: > > > There are few drivers(for example stmpe-gpio) which are available on i2c > > > bus but has been initialized as subsys initcall. Therefore i2c driver > > > must also be initialized as subsys initcall. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Pratyush Anand <pratyush.anand@xxxxxx> > > > --- > > > > NAK. > > > > Dependency problem like this one should be solved using the probe deferral > > mechanism, when it's merged > > (http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.omap/65436). Sprinkling those > > really_really_early_initcall() all over the place is unreasonable IMO. > > Being a bus driver in this particular case, don't you think that it > should explicitly appear before devices using this bus. Dependencies should be stated explicitly. Since this subsys_initcall thing is quite common among the i2c masters I'm willing to ack this one for now. But the real solution is to make the dependencies between devices clear and explicit. baruch -- ~. .~ Tk Open Systems =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= - baruch@xxxxxxxxxx - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il - -- 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
