On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 01:58:14PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 01:46:12PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 11:59:02AM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote: > > > > Also, if we add this call, then I am wondering if we still need ... > > > > > > class_for_each_device(®ulator_class, NULL, NULL, > > > regulator_register_resolve_supply); > > > Possibly not. That line was introduced to hook up existing orphan > > regulators with their parents when they were registered, but I guess > > since we now always defer probe if a parent isn't registered yet the > > line would become a no-op. > > That then takes us right the way back to the original problem where > people we're getting upset at the number of probe deferrals they were > seeing and more importantly we didn't have any way of sorting out > dependencies within a single PMIC if the parents weren't registered > before their children.
Isn't that usually solved by making each regulator of a PMIC a separate device (platform device, typically, for MFD devices? That way each of them is probed separately allowing the dependency cycle to be broken. Thierry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

