On 11/13/2013 03:29 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 02:59:01PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 11/13/2013 01:49 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > >>> No, with DT you can say that if there is no DT binding configuring >>> a given thing (clock, regulator, GPIO or whatever) then no amount >>> of module loading will ever cause it to appear - this is what the >>> flag in question controls. > >> But we do have a binding for regulators, so wouldn't that flag always >> be true? > > In theory. In practice people often add bindings for devices without > including the regulators and then someone comes along and adds the > regulators later, perhaps not even using a system with DT, and renders > all existing DTs buggy. This is generally miserable for everyone so > it's better if we're liberal in what we accept. But that's a per-binding issue. Earlier, you wrote: >> The only issue you may have to watch out for is: When is >> regulator_init() called (i.e. when does core_initcall happen) relative >> to when driver probe()s can be called? If it's earlier, then >> core_initcall is early enough I suspect. > > What I said was to set this up when we hand the DT over to the DT code > to be parsed so that we don't need to worry about any gaps like that, > it seems like a more direct solution than worrying about initcall > ordering. That sounds like a system-global flag, not a per-device/binding flag. Has the conversation shifted topics? And indeed, I've been talking about the system-global has_full_constraints flag all along here. >> Perhaps you can suggest a name for the flag, and a specific set of >> conditions when it will have specific values. That might help me >> understand what you mean. > > Well, of_have_populated_dt() is essentially doing the same thing > (probably, I don't know if it's set at quite the right time) - it's > saying we have a DT. We could even change the users to check that as > well if it's doing the right thing. But the regulator code already calls of_have_populated_dt() in order to determine whether to set has_full_constraints = true; The only issue is that it does it too late. If of_have_populated_dt() is the flag that the code should key off, what's wrong with the suggestion I made yesterday to simply move the existing code (that uses of_have_populated_dt()) to an earlier location? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
