On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 01:45:12AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > This is a laudable goal, but then device-tree needs to be able to > express device dependencies better. Until then board-specific code is > needed to register devices in proper order. Like Grant says this really isn't terribly sustainable - it's not just the device registration you need to sort out, it's also the registration of the drivers so things actually get bound and handing of any delays in the process of getting things to appear. It's not trivial to get this right in the general case and it's not reasonable to expect individual boards to open code things, we really do need core code to figure things out in some fashion (ideally data rather than retry driven). > > Sounds interesting. So the probe function could return some sort of -ENOTYET > > or -EAGAIN and have it called again later? > How about we do not register device until all resources are ready? This > is pretty simple concept - do not create an object until it is usable. Then > nobody needs to bother with -EAGAIN or -ENOTYET or any other similar > garbage. As soon as you let the user build drivers modular this goes out of the window. All the faff with initcall ordering that we do at the minute is essentially trying to implement this mechanism. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
