From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-x22c.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::22c]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1aBmOk-00009m-3M for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 23 Dec 2015 16:36:22 +0000 Received: by mail-wm0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id p187so152850282wmp.1 for ; Wed, 23 Dec 2015 08:36:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 17:35:51 +0100 From: Alexander Aring Message-ID: <20151223163532.GA1068@omega> References: <20151223191058.4ffb07f4@berta> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151223191058.4ffb07f4@berta> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [RFC] device probe order To: Peter Mamonov Cc: barebox On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 07:10:58PM +0300, Peter Mamonov wrote: > Dear All, > > I've ported an UHCI driver from the u-boot to the barebox (WIP). To > interoperate with the EHCI driver, the UHCI driver should be probed > ater the EHCI driver. Both drivers are binded via the device tree > mechanism. How can i achieve the correct probe order? > Normally this should done by returning "-EPROBE_DEFER" inside the probe function. There was some RFC last years for supporting EPROBE_DEFER [0] and it seems these are mainline. However you need some bool which indicates that the EHCI driver is probed. int uhci_probe(foobar) { if (!indicate_ehci_is_probed(foobar) return -EPROBE_DEFER; } - Alex [0] http://barebox.infradead.narkive.com/ZWIXXU0R/patch-v2-0-6-introduce-deferred-probing _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox