On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 7:35 AM, Mark Brown <broo...@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 01:21:40PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 11/11/2012 05:22 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > >> > Another solution that was discussed was whether to move >> > the default pinctrl handle and state grab to the device >> > core as an optional field in struct device itself, but >> > I'd like to first propose this less intrusive mechanism. > >> I think doing that approach makes a lot more sense; wouldn't it >> completely avoid the issues with deferred probe that this notifier-based >> method can't solve? It would also be very much in line with e.g. >> dev_get_regmap() - if every resource that a driver required were handled >> like that, then deferred probe could be significantly isolated into the >> driver core rather than in every driver... > > I have to say that I agree with this, notifiers seem to make life more > complicated for limited gain. Otherwise I guess we could enhance > notifiers so that they're able to trigger deferrals?
OK I'll have to come up with a patch to the device core instead... it'll be much simpler anyway and if both of you guys can back it I guess Greg might be OK with it too. Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
