From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 387C2C4CEC4 for ; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 09:09:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D108206C2 for ; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 09:09:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="P4FNd9Rh" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730243AbfIRJJn (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:09:43 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f196.google.com ([209.85.210.196]:44459 "EHLO mail-pf1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726491AbfIRJJm (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Sep 2019 05:09:42 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-f196.google.com with SMTP id q21so3943390pfn.11 for ; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 02:09:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=G4hxKX4C+UwHppyagtwLzLYaYfdx3vbwuhfidaVb/nQ=; b=P4FNd9RhBzPlUfc1CQgYZsdIp18bxRVlkkoZx0inyMmXAe3hlUh8czZiU3x2EXhloM xvD7raK2qEG2tfvU8zA8qkG9bqGM+K9BtXJeoSLDVDCpiWqJcwOx0JVNpFJqD12g0ALM 3EVMoKO99I+KmpFFCWKFqTQtlLC9xXOML1tFkkzbnLZDxZev7cUSKP6ICbBh4Dlo54XM O1gfiHx0z+t/QTOgydvUKlpylJGKx1yxBHMv8eUX4a93dnJaj/iwojIWEAcxBh/x7zsR cGujmLM//sZv8mFmZmasmc1fV8975M2mO3BtZHVkgGhL2Qcvd1i9qrgWoLMWkbmv0T5a /eLg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=G4hxKX4C+UwHppyagtwLzLYaYfdx3vbwuhfidaVb/nQ=; b=BOQv1WgcQXPum5klY2z4K+j31Rzpo6gjaylVX+3/MmvOedoC2T8Qo3kBoizbXP7KE9 ccgIzZ8L83Sl2xVeRHFeuZXsq0pgRvwu6Kse2xLim1g2b9XHZRISHXyIyQxn06mWOI/4 mn3DYEQX0jKbR1eoCDMFm6y8DvyCUdtZOl1RoHfiEZU9mneRAszu+edkAkKnY8oC1EOE FZzVKSvFZq8J2PKLLoRZ7N3h8dlKihHYqZAssh4fHNA0DLQi7x4WKeMwFaW2MWbMpJ77 VD0F9huLSPMJiGroscxcMdL8izJwKWDt3rHkhEcSliL/+KPxYZ8CpXtt5BAbFJgK/vIR 92xw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUsrFHkAFWjb1GQ8BHx03eqWwSAgDjrNe61WiV/MuQeI2t1S4oP aBv9GJDfGJTUQy3SO4JBvYdf9g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxuV3bkoKSY6omGfYg+Szis0+eINu6ixhAs6qhxUbtS4C+EJcXtKq6zOKPNR7eTL+V5NLEaCw== X-Received: by 2002:a63:465c:: with SMTP id v28mr3046498pgk.310.1568797781919; Wed, 18 Sep 2019 02:09:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([122.172.73.172]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v44sm13954434pgn.17.2019.09.18.02.09.40 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 18 Sep 2019 02:09:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2019 14:39:38 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar To: Sudeep Holla Cc: Amit Kucheria , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, edubezval@gmail.com, agross@kernel.org, tdas@codeaurora.org, swboyd@chromium.org, ilina@codeaurora.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Daniel Lezcano , Zhang Rui , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] cpufreq: qcom-hw: Move driver initialisation earlier Message-ID: <20190918090938.b2fj5uk3h6t56t2p@vireshk-mac-ubuntu> References: <20190917093412.GA24757@bogus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190917093412.GA24757@bogus> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 17-09-19, 10:34, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 04:02:34AM +0530, Amit Kucheria wrote: > > -device_initcall(qcom_cpufreq_hw_init); > > +postcore_initcall(qcom_cpufreq_hw_init); > > I am fine with core framework initcall pushed to earlier initcall levels > if required, but for individual/platform specific drivers I am not so > happy to see that. > > This goes against the grand plan of single common kernel strategy by > Android moving all drivers as modules. Its been long that I got the opportunity to work on drivers directly, but as far as I remember (which should be incorrect based on your reply) we can still build a driver as module even if it has some postcore_initcall() declarations. They will execute at module insertion. Is that incorrect ? If not, then how is it going to affect android effort ? -- viresh