From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756349AbaHVNVb (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Aug 2014 09:21:31 -0400 Received: from cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com ([217.140.96.50]:48653 "EHLO cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756190AbaHVNVa (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Aug 2014 09:21:30 -0400 Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 14:19:19 +0100 From: Mark Rutland To: Alexander Holler Cc: Thierry Reding , "grant.likely@linaro.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Jon Loeliger , Russell King , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Rob Herring , Arnd Bergmann , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] dt: dependencies (for deterministic driver initialization order based on the DT) Message-ID: <20140822131919.GX21734@leverpostej> References: <1399913280-6915-1-git-send-email-holler@ahsoftware.de> <20140514141914.446F7C4153D@trevor.secretlab.ca> <20140821140211.GD19293@ulmo.nvidia.com> <53F64624.5000403@ahsoftware.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53F64624.5000403@ahsoftware.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 08:19:00PM +0100, Alexander Holler wrote: > Am 21.08.2014 16:02, schrieb Thierry Reding: > > > Anyway, those are all fairly standard reasons for where deferred probe > > triggers, and since I do like deferred probe for it's simplicity and > > reliability I'd rather not try to work around it if boot time is all > > that people are concerned about. > > It's neither simple nor reliable. It's non deterministic brutforcing > while making it almost impossible to identify real errors. It's horrible, yes. > In my humble opinion the worst way to solve something. I'm pretty sure > if I would have suggest such a solution, the maintainer crowd would have > eaten me without cooking. We didn't have a better workable solution at the time. Having a hack that got boards booting was considered better than not having them boot. I don't remember people being particularly enthralled by the idea. Thanks, Mark.