From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754851AbcHSQTS (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2016 12:19:18 -0400 Received: from mail-it0-f44.google.com ([209.85.214.44]:34115 "EHLO mail-it0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754211AbcHSQTP (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2016 12:19:15 -0400 From: Kevin Hilman To: Heiko Stuebner Cc: Finlye Xiao , srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org, maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, frowand.list@gmail.com, sre@kernel.org, dbaryshkov@gmail.com, dwmw2@infradead.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, nm@ti.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, viresh.kumar@linaro.org, sboyd@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, wxt@rock-chips.com, jay.xu@rock-chips.com, rocky.hao@rock-chips.com, tim.chen@rock-chips.com, tony.xie@rock-chips.com, ulysses.huang@rock-chips.com, lin.huang@rock-chips.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] nvmem: rockchip-efuse: Change initcall to subsys Organization: BayLibre References: <1471510341-63926-1-git-send-email-finley.xiao@rock-chips.com> <1471510341-63926-2-git-send-email-finley.xiao@rock-chips.com> <2844104.lMUOkH8YJy@phil> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 11:19:13 -0500 In-Reply-To: <2844104.lMUOkH8YJy@phil> (Heiko Stuebner's message of "Fri, 19 Aug 2016 00:29:55 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (darwin) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Heiko Stuebner writes: > Am Donnerstag, 18. August 2016, 13:28:58 CEST schrieb Kevin Hilman: >> Finlye Xiao writes: >> > From: Finley Xiao >> > >> > We will register a cpufreq notifier for adjusting opp's voltage, and it >> > need to fetch cpu's leakage from efuse in the notifier_call. so the efuse >> > driver should probe before cpufreq driver. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Finley Xiao >> >> Why can't this be handled with deferred probling? initcall ordering is >> a can of worms. > > I think the issue is less between efuse and avs driver, but more between avs > driver and cpufreq. The avs driver aims to modify the opp table and thus wants > to do that / register the notifier before cpufreq starts. > > And as there is no direct connection between cpufreq and the avs driver, > making cpufreq defer probing is probably not really easy. Thanks for the explanation. Sounds like something that belongs in the changelog. Kevin