On 11/07/2018 12:13:17-0600, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:15 AM Alexandre Belloni > <alexandre.bell...@bootlin.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On 09/07/2018 09:50:47-0600, Rob Herring wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 3:40 PM Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > The DT core will call of_platform_default_populate, so it is not > > > > necessary for machine specific code to call it unless there are custom > > > > match entries, auxdata or parent device. Neither of those apply here, so > > > > remove the call. > > > > > > > > Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.fe...@microchip.com> > > > > Cc: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.bell...@bootlin.com> > > > > Cc: linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org > > > > Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org> > > > > --- > > > > arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200.c | 5 ----- > > > > arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9.c | 5 ----- > > > > arch/arm/mach-at91/sama5.c | 5 ----- > > > > 3 files changed, 15 deletions(-) > > > > > > Ping? > > > > > > > This breaks the platform in two different ways: > > - PM is not working anymore because of the missing SRAM node > > - the pinctrl driver fails to probe and so many drivers are > > deferring the probe forever > > > > Relevant messages (once the earlycon crap is removed to let earlyprintk > > do its job): > > > > at91_pm_sram_init: failed to find sram device! > > AT91: PM not supported, due to no SRAM allocated > > So the at91_pm_sram_init function tries to get SRAM platform device, > but it doesn't exist yet. Of course, that is fragile because while the > device may exist, it's just luck that it's driver has probed already. > Would using .init_late hook instead of .init_machine work for you? > > Ideally, couldn't much of this code be converted to a driver? It's a > bit strange for initcall code to have a driver dependency. >
.init_late seems to work after testing quickly You probably didn't see it because they still have a soc_device parent but Arnd wanted us to remove it so it is gone. > > > > pinctrl-at91 ahb:apb:pinctrl@fc06a000: you need to specify at least one > > gpio-controller > > pinctrl-at91: probe of ahb:apb:pinctrl@fc06a000 failed with error -22 > > So this one has the strange dependency that the child nodes probe > before the parent node. That's backwards. Probe order is probably > changing from link order (all the devices are created before drivers > register) to device creation order. I think the fix is the pinctrl > driver should just count the gpio child nodes rather than relying on > aliases (which I'm not a fan of either). I can write a patch to do > that. I'll let you do that. -- Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com