On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Hiroshi DOYU <Hiroshi.DOYU@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: ext Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/17] omap: mailbox: reorganize init > Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 18:57:55 +0200 > >> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Hiroshi DOYU <Hiroshi.DOYU@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> From: ext Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> >>>> I'm not familiar with this kind of module loading, but certainly not >>>> all systems have udev. >>>> >>>> I realized the problem because I have a bare-bones system in my >>>> beagleboard where I had to manually load mailbox_mach. >>> >>> With udev or something equivalent, it should work fine. >> >> But still, you are relying on udev. I don't think we should, and I >> don't think there's any need. > > Some expert may give some comment here..... Russell, Tony: should mailbox_mach, a module that checks for logical devices be always built-in? I think that's the easiest... in my patches I moved the architecture-specific code from mach-omapX/devices.c to mach-omapX/mailbox.c, so both the logical devices and real platform devices are in the same code, and can be built-in. This way, there's no need to rely on services like udev to load mailbox, then mailbox_mach, then bridgedriver. After all, all mailbox_mach is doing is calling functions in mailbox to register the logical devices. Judging from: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/58555 The answer is yes. -- Felipe Contreras -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
