On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 03:43:56PM +0100, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > On 17.12.19 15:06, Greg KH wrote: > > > That's not needed, and you are going to break the implicit ordering we > > already have with link order. > > Ups, 10 points for you - I didn't consider that. > > > You are going to have to figure out what > > bus type the driver is, to determine what segment it was in, to figure > > out what was loaded before what. > > hmm, if it's just the ordering by bus type (but not within one bus > type), then it shouldn't be the big deal to fix, as I'll need one table > and register-loop per bus-type anyways. > > By the way: how is there init order ensured with dynamically loaded > modules ? (for cases where there aren't explicit symbol dependencies) See the recent work in the driver core for DT fixes for that very issue. greg k-h
