On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:18:08AM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 10/21/2015 9:27 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > Overall boot time and time to get some individual built in component up > > and running aren't the same thing - what this'll do is get things up > > more in the link order of the leaf consumers rather than deferring those > > leaf consumers when their dependencies aren't ready yet. > Thanks! I read too much into what was being improved. > So this patch series, which on other merits may be a good idea, is as > a by product solving a specific ordering issue, moving successful panel > initialization to an earlier point in the boot sequence, if I now > understand more correctly. Yeah, that's my understanding. > In that context, this seems like yet another ad hoc way of causing the > probe order to change in a way to solves one specific issue? Could > it just as likely move the boot order of some other driver on some > other board later, to the detriment of somebody else? Indeed. My general feeling is that it does make the link order stuff more predictable and easier to work with and it does have other merits (in terms of the error reporting, though there's other ways to address that like the one Russell is proposing).
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
