From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:201:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kUxvR-0004dc-39 for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 20:08:05 +0000 Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 22:08:03 +0200 From: Marco Felsch Message-ID: <20201020200803.tzrz7zh6jeca5r2h@pengutronix.de> References: <20200930084716.4200-1-m.felsch@pengutronix.de> <20200930084716.4200-5-m.felsch@pengutronix.de> <20201020161853.myiu3wtlc6dod6g4@pengutronix.de> <0ebc5b33-11c4-ab3c-8e6c-ba86c8f6cfb6@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0ebc5b33-11c4-ab3c-8e6c-ba86c8f6cfb6@pengutronix.de> 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: [PATCH v2 4/8] initcall: add of_populate_initcall To: Ahmad Fatoum Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org On 20-10-20 18:50, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: > Hi, > > On 10/20/20 6:18 PM, Marco Felsch wrote: > > Hi Ahmad, > > > > On 20-10-02 07:53, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 9/30/20 10:47 AM, Marco Felsch wrote: > > > > ... > > > >>> @@ -61,9 +64,10 @@ typedef void (*exitcall_t)(void); > >>> #define fs_initcall(fn) __define_initcall("9",fn,9) > >>> #define device_initcall(fn) __define_initcall("10",fn,10) > >>> #define crypto_initcall(fn) __define_initcall("11",fn,11) > >>> -#define late_initcall(fn) __define_initcall("12",fn,12) > >>> -#define environment_initcall(fn) __define_initcall("13",fn,13) > >>> -#define postenvironment_initcall(fn) __define_initcall("14",fn,14) > >>> +#define of_populate_initcall(fn) __define_initcall("12",fn,15) > >> > >> s/15/12/ ? (Likewise below) > > > > I would like to keep it before late_initcall() due to the impact of that > > initcall and following environment_initcall(). At least the > > environment_initcall() assumes that devices are available to setup the > > /env correctly. Therefore I added it before late_initcall(). I can give > > it a try to move it behind the late_inicall if you want. > > Case in point! s/15/12/ doesn't change the initcall order, it only ensures > that you don't expand to __initcall_##fn##15 __section(.initcall.12) which > is confusing. Apparently it confused you to think I mean changing the > actual init level too :-) Arg.. damn now I see. Of course I will align it. Didn't saw the 15 on the end.. Thanks :) Regards, Marco _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox