Device probe order (i2c regulator vs. platform device)
broonie at opensource.wolfsonmicro.com
Wed Mar 24 09:11:31 EDT 2010
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 12:50:46PM +0000, Andy Green wrote:
> On 03/24/10 11:11, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
> Hi -
> >Right, this is a really common case. Maybe this callback could be added
> >to the regulator framework as well?
Looks like there's somethin up with the quoting configuration in your
mail client. Apart from the bit where it's removing the name of the
person you're quoting it appears to have dropped a level of indentation
off the above quote, which is from you rather than me.
> >On the other hand a more generic solution might be needed, because besides
> >the PMU there might be some other dependences between various devices that
> >not possible to be ensured in the current framework (I'm thinking of v4l2
> >subdevs that link 2 separate devices together, but currently are used only
> >with i2c clients).
> Right, it's a generic issue with needing to delay other device
> registration until something else has completed probe, not just PMU.
> PMU is just the most common parent.
> A callback is needed after probe() returned without error somehow.
I rather suspect that the approach you suggest would have some usability
issues, especially on PCs which don't by and by large have custom board
code at all. Something more data driven, or handled more in drivers, is
probably in order if this does get done. Anyway, this should probably
be discussed elsewhere.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel