On 10/28/2014 05:57 AM, Frans Klaver wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 04:27:45PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
>>
>> On 10/27/2014 10:56 AM, Roger Quadros wrote:
>>
>>> Alternatively we could fix either elm_config() or omap_nand_probe() to
>>> return -EPROBE_DEFER in case the device is present but driver not yet 
>>> probed.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, that's a good idea. Can't we do both? Getting a systematic deferred
>> probe sounds like a bit silly to me.
> 
> It may be. If we do both and something moves again, or something is
> added that depends on omap_elm but is probed earlier, you won't be
> noticing the new systematic probe deferral until you really start
> looking at it.
> 

That's correct. Relying on the link order is very fragile.

> There isn't a real dependency system in the drivers, is there?
> 

Nope.

-- 
Ezequiel Garcia, VanguardiaSur
www.vanguardiasur.com.ar

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to