Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 20:11:27 -0700
From: David Cohen <david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com>
To: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] usb: ulpi: ulpi_init should be executed in
 subsys_initcall
Message-ID: <20150522031127.GB28433@psi-dev26.jf.intel.com>
References: <1432260425-2350-1-git-send-email-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
 <20150522030954.GA28433@psi-dev26.jf.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150522030954.GA28433@psi-dev26.jf.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1075
Lines: 26

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 08:09:54PM -0700, David Cohen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:07:05AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
> > Many drivers and modules depend on ULPI bus registeration to
> > register ULPI interfaces and drivers. It's more appropriate
> > to register ULPI bus in subsys_initcall instead of module_init.
> > 
> > Kernel panic has been reported with some kind of kernel config.
> 
> Even though I agree subsys_initcall is better to register ulpi bus, it's
> still no excuse to have kernel panic. What about ULPI bus being compiled
> as module?
> IMHO this is avoiding the proper kernel panic fix which should be
> failing gracefully (or defer probe) from tusb1210 driver.

Maybe I need to express myself better :)
IMHO we should not consider work done with this patch only. It's still
incomplete.

Br, David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/