From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753557AbbFDMTO (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 4 Jun 2015 08:19:14 -0400
Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:56987 "EHLO mga11.intel.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752081AbbFDMTN (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 4 Jun 2015 08:19:13 -0400
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,552,1427785200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="740878661"
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 15:17:00 +0300
From: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
To: "Lu, Baolu" <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: David Cohen <david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, balbi@ti.com,
        linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] usb: ulpi: ulpi_init should be executed in
 subsys_initcall
Message-ID: <20150604121700.GA6283@kuha.fi.intel.com>
References: <1432691137-2635-1-git-send-email-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
 <20150527023702.GA7038@kroah.com>
 <20150527165327.GB1028@psi-dev26.jf.intel.com>
 <55666644.1060305@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <55666644.1060305@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Baolu,

On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 08:50:12AM +0800, Lu, Baolu wrote:
> On 05/28/2015 12:53 AM, David Cohen wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 07:37:02PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >>On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 09:45:37AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
> >>>Phy drivers and the ulpi interface providers depend on the
> >>>registration of the ulpi bus.  Ulpi registers the bus in
> >>>module_init(). This could cause unnecessary probe delays.
> >>What do you mean by "probe delays"?
> >I believe he meant the bus users' probe delays. i.e. unnecessary
> >-EPROBE_DEFER happening on ulpi_drivers in case they're registered
> >before ulpi bus itself.
> >
> >Is that correct, Baolu?
> 
> Yes.

Could you prepare one more version of this patche with the change log
included.


Thanks,

-- 
heikki