> So, the idea is that the startup improvement of rcar_i2c_driver_init()
> comes at the cost of a slower cs2000_driver_init(). In the end,
> there is no benefit

Thank you for the measurements and heads up on this! Much appreciated.
The results match my expectations.

> If evidence in the form of measurements showing improved behavior
> is not enough for the patch to be accepted, then we have no choice but
> to keep the patch out-of-tree as a "workaround", hoping that we'll be able
> to come up with a better/cleaner solution in future.

I am all with you. It is not that I don't want faster boot times. Yet,
unless we know if this is a proper solution and not a workaround for
just some use cases, I am reluctant to apply it to the upstream kernel.

Thanks and kind regards,


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to