Hi, On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 05:27:43PM +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 09:00:48AM -0600, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 11:24:02AM +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 11:45:09AM -0700, David Cohen wrote: > > > > > I think adding the module exit + allowing this driver to be a module > > > > > would be a good approach. Then we don't need to force generic x86 kernel > > > > > binaries to always have this driver. Unless Mathias or Mika knows a > > > > > constraint to force this driver to be builtin only. > > > > > > > > It helps if I CC them when asking for feedback :) > > > > > > > > Mathias, Mika, do you know any constraint that forces pinctrl-baytrail > > > > to be bool? > > > > > > The only constraint that has been keeping this driver as bool is that > > > some machines like, Asus T100, uses ACPI GPIO operation regions for > > > toggling GPIOs to get things like sensor hub powered on. The GPIO > > > operation region code does not yet handle -EPROBE_DEFER so only way to > > > ensure that the operation region is there is to have the driver compiled > > > in to the kernel. > > > > But that's not enough excuse to have every single x86 in the market > > shipping with this driver. Think about a distro kernel, most likely this > > gets enabled and it's wrong in 80% of the cases. > > True, but see below. > > > It would be nicer to add EPROBE_DEFER support, convert this into > > tristate and have default = M if BAYTRAIL, or something. > > If it were simple as that we would have done that already. Please check > drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c:acpi_gpio_adr_space_handler() and tell me > how we can do that. > > The problem is that it is *firmware* code that decides to use the GPIO > at some random point in time and we have no way to tell it to retry > later when the GPIO is available. which means that even with the driver built-in, there is still the possibility that firmware will try to access it before pinctrl-baytrail's init function is called and you'd end up in the same situation. The fact is that currently you're forcing every x86 (even non-Intel) to ship with this driver statically linked into it just because a small percent of x86 systems might need to have this ready-to-go early enough. Unfortunately I don't know ACPI enough to tell you if there is a way to tell firmware "hey, you can use GPIOs now", so I'l refrain from commenting on that. But that doesn't change the fact that this is wrong. -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature