Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <09611b2d-096e-058b-5349-627684e3a13c@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
Date:   Sat, 19 Nov 2022 22:57:02 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.2.2
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: imx8mp: register driver at arch_initcall time
Content-Language: en-US, da
To:     Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>
Cc:     Abel Vesa <abelvesa@kernel.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
        NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org
References: <20220928124108.500369-1-linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
 <CAOMZO5BPtEU6VCZXRk5FTHXDad6cegF=+oHTTA0wgjBuoh9-rQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
In-Reply-To: <CAOMZO5BPtEU6VCZXRk5FTHXDad6cegF=+oHTTA0wgjBuoh9-rQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 19/11/2022 22.38, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 9:41 AM Rasmus Villemoes
> <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> wrote:
>>
>> We have an imx8mp-based board with an external gpio-triggered
>> watchdog. Currently, we don't get to handle that in time before it
>> resets the board.
>>
>> The probe of the watchdog device gets deferred because the SOC's GPIO
>> controller is not yet ready, and the probe of that in turn gets deferred
>> because its clock provider (namely, this driver) is not yet
>> ready. Altogether, the watchdog does not get handled until the late
>> initcall deferred_probe_initcall has made sure all leftover devices
>> have been probed, and that's way too late.
>>
>> Aside from being necessary for our board, this also reduces total boot
>> time because fewer device probes get deferred.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
>> ---
>> It would probably be reasonable to do the same to the other imx8m* clk
>> drivers, but I don't have any such hardware to test on.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
>> +static void __exit imx8mp_clk_exit(void)
>> +{
>> +       platform_driver_unregister(&imx8mp_clk_driver);
>> +}
>> +module_exit(imx8mp_clk_exit);
> 
> Isn't module_exit() unnecessary here, since we pass suppress_bind_attrs = true?

Sorry, I don't follow. Before this patch, the driver also implicitly had
a module_exit() doing exactly this platform_driver_unregister(), it was
just hidden inside the module_platform_driver() macro. And I think
that's necessary if one wants to test that the module can be loaded and
unloaded (I don't think it's ever useful or even possible to have it be
a module on an actual imx8mp board).

For a modular build, this patch changes nothing since all foo_initcall
levels are translated to module_initcall for those. And when the driver
is built-in, the __exit code, both before and after this patch, is
discarded in the final image.

Rasmus