On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Shawn Guo <shawn....@linaro.org> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 08:54:26AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 09:38:43AM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: >> > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 10:45:02AM -0500, Rob Lee wrote: >> > > >> Let me try last time. What about having a late_initcall hook in >> > > >> machine_desc? >> > > > >> > > > Also fine with me. >> > > > >> > > >> > > Shall I add Shawn's patch to my imx cpuidle patchset or should the >> > > arch/arm/kernel/setup.c and arch.h changes be submitted separately? >> > > If separately, Shawn, did you want to submit this patch or should I? >> > > >> > Strange. Russell is not in the Cc list. I remember I added Russell >> > into Cc when I propose the idea. Added him again. >> >> I didn't see any message in this thread cc'd to me, but that's not to >> say I hadn't already read this patch. I don't have any comment against >> it, but I do wonder how often this hook would be used. >> > I guess mach-* that use common cpuidle will likely need this hook. > >> We do seem to have quite a number of late_initcall()s in arch/arm/mach-*, >> so it seems to be a good idea - provided someone's willing to convert all >> those users of late_initcall()s. > > Agreed. The late_initcall()s in arch/arm/mach-* will not scale for > long time, since we are moving toward single build. >
Thanks for the attention on this. From what I've understood, I will send another submission that includes the imx cpuidle patchset and Shawn's device tree late initcall patchset and I'll provide explanation of the two separate patchsets in the cover sheet. > -- > Regards, > Shawn _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev