On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 at 01:43, Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Turning on initcall debug on one system showed this:
> initcall sdhci_msm_driver_init+0x0/0x28 returned 0 after 34782 usecs
>
> The lion's share of this time (~33 ms) was in mmc_power_up(). This
> shouldn't be terribly surprising since there are a few calls to delay
> based on "power_delay_ms" and the default delay there is 10 ms.
>
> Because we haven't specified that we'd prefer asynchronous probe for
> this driver then we'll wait for this driver to finish before we start
> probes for more drivers. While 33 ms doesn't sound like tons, every
> little bit counts.
>
> There should be little problem with turning on asynchronous probe for
> this driver. It's already possible that previous drivers may have
> turned on asynchronous probe so we might already have other things
> (that probed before us) probing at the same time we are anyway. This
> driver isn't really providing resources (clocks, regulators, etc) that
> other drivers need to probe and even if it was they should be handling
> -EPROBE_DEFER.
>
> Let's turn this on and get a bit of boot speed back.
Thanks for a very well written commit message!
Indeed, I am sure many mmc host drivers could benefit from a similar
change. At least regular platform drivers and amba drivers are pretty
sure to work, but who knows.
>
> Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Applied for next, thanks!
Kind regards
Uffe
> ---
>
> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
> index d4c02884cca8..9dd0dbb65382 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
> @@ -2542,6 +2542,7 @@ static struct platform_driver sdhci_msm_driver = {
> .name = "sdhci_msm",
> .of_match_table = sdhci_msm_dt_match,
> .pm = &sdhci_msm_pm_ops,
> + .probe_type = PROBE_PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS,
> },
> };
>
> --
> 2.28.0.402.g5ffc5be6b7-goog
>
