From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752918AbbLVNlv (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Dec 2015 08:41:51 -0500 Received: from mail-vk0-f52.google.com ([209.85.213.52]:36377 "EHLO mail-vk0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751520AbbLVNlt (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Dec 2015 08:41:49 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1450791416.20501.7.camel@mtksdaap41> References: <1450412497-25872-1-git-send-email-djkurtz@chromium.org> <1450791416.20501.7.camel@mtksdaap41> From: Daniel Kurtz Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 21:41:28 +0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: iwe4G0i2iKtv1yDLsISueoaQSjs Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: mediatek: convert to arch_initcall To: Yingjoe Chen Cc: Linus Walleij , Matthias Brugger , Fabio Estevam , Hongzhou Yang , Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD , Fabian Frederick , Maoguang Meng , Axel Lin , Patrice Chotard , "open list:PIN CONTROL SUBSYSTEM" , open list , "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" , "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Yingjoe Chen wrote: > On Tue, 2015-12-22 at 11:23 +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 5:21 AM, Daniel Kurtz wrote: >> >> > Move pinctrl initialization earlier in boot so that real devices can find >> > their pctldev without probe deferring. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Kurtz >> >> I interpret the discussion as I should wait for a new version of this? >> >> Or should it be applied? > > We'll have another patch to change init orders for pwrap, mt6397 mfd > core and mt6397 regulator. Before that, the mt6397 pinctrl changes in > this patch won't work as expect. Apply this now won't cause any problem > either, unless someone think we should stink to current orders. > > So I think we could apply this now: > > Acked-by: Yingjoe Chen > > Joe.C Joe.C, Linus, Thanks for the Ack. I think it is cleaner if I just send a new patch without the mt6397 change. So, I'll do that in a bit.