From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sricharan@codeaurora.org (Sricharan) Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 12:23:00 +0530 Subject: [RFC 0/9] IOMMU probe deferral support In-Reply-To: References: <1461599894-1969-1-git-send-email-sricharan@codeaurora.org> Message-ID: <000001d1ace4$1ac1e250$5045a6f0$@codeaurora.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Marek, > -----Original Message----- > From: linux-arm-kernel [mailto:linux-arm-kernel- > bounces at lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of Marek Szyprowski > Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2016 6:23 PM > To: Sricharan R ; will.deacon at arm.com; > robin.murphy at arm.com; joro at 8bytes.org; iommu at lists.linux- > foundation.org; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org; > laurent.pinchart at ideasonboard.com > Subject: Re: [RFC 0/9] IOMMU probe deferral support > > Hello, > > > On 2016-04-25 17:58, Sricharan R wrote: > > This is mostly a repost of the probe deferral series from Laurent > > Pinchart [1]. Added a check to fix boot with ACPI. > > Adapted arm-smmu driver to work with deferred probing and added a new > > api for the below reason. This is based on the generic iommu binding > > series from Robin Murphy . > > Thanks for this patchset. I'm working on some serious rework in exynos > power domains and clocks support code and it turned out that I need this > feature to resolve probing order. It works fine on my internal tree, where > some iommu controllers cannot get their clocks early enough. > > Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski > Thanks for testing. So the issue that I was facing also was the same where the iommu controllers cannot get clocks early. So waiting for some suggestions if this is right/ or there is another way for doing this probe deferral? Regards, Sricharan