Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 18 Sep 2019 14:39:38 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Cc:     Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@linaro.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, edubezval@gmail.com, agross@kernel.org,
        tdas@codeaurora.org, swboyd@chromium.org, ilina@codeaurora.org,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
        Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] cpufreq: qcom-hw: Move driver initialisation earlier
Message-ID: <20190918090938.b2fj5uk3h6t56t2p@vireshk-mac-ubuntu>
References: <cover.1568240476.git.amit.kucheria@linaro.org>
 <b731b713d8738239c26361ece7f5cadea035b353.1568240476.git.amit.kucheria@linaro.org>
 <20190917093412.GA24757@bogus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190917093412.GA24757@bogus>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 17-09-19, 10:34, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 04:02:34AM +0530, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> > -device_initcall(qcom_cpufreq_hw_init);
> > +postcore_initcall(qcom_cpufreq_hw_init);
> 
> I am fine with core framework initcall pushed to earlier initcall levels
> if required, but for individual/platform specific drivers I am not so
> happy to see that.
> 
> This goes against the grand plan of single common kernel strategy by
> Android moving all drivers as modules.

Its been long that I got the opportunity to work on drivers directly, but as far
as I remember (which should be incorrect based on your reply) we can still build
a driver as module even if it has some postcore_initcall() declarations. They
will execute at module insertion. Is that incorrect ? If not, then how is it
going to affect android effort ?

-- 
viresh