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 S1757487AbcIONTK (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 15 Sep 2016 09:19:10 -0400
Received: from relay1.mentorg.com ([192.94.38.131]:49655 "EHLO
        relay1.mentorg.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1754290AbcIONS6 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 15 Sep 2016 09:18:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Crashing 'kzm' target in next-20160913 due to 'gpio: mxc: shift
 gpio_mxc_init() to subsys_initcall level'
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
References: <9befb559-499a-dd70-cd44-60d5fce2e5d6@roeck-us.net>
 <CACRpkdbs8ZDw6tC-6OgtiRve7xogbXvsdqauxNPssbphmO9pGg@mail.gmail.com>
 <16c144a0-e967-e35a-2abd-9942d0d6c944@roeck-us.net>
 <CACRpkdYfW+K6D-sGMWhBOr1dQBjk8pCnipOmBQPtFd+5txQOYQ@mail.gmail.com>
CC: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>
From: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@mentor.com>
Message-ID: <e8c499c7-1435-5305-649d-9e91e479a061@mentor.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 16:18:55 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Icedove/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CACRpkdYfW+K6D-sGMWhBOr1dQBjk8pCnipOmBQPtFd+5txQOYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [137.202.0.76]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Linus,

On 09/15/2016 03:19 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
>> On 09/14/2016 12:19 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 5:20 AM, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> So, in other words, lots of bugs here. Nevertheless, I would suggest to
>>>> keep
>>>> using postcore_initcall(), at least until it is sure that all gpio
>>>> clients handle
>>>> -EPROBE_DEFER
>>>> correctly.
>>>
>>>
>>> So can I just revert this patch in isolation? None of the other patches
>>> depend on it?
>>>
>> Good question, if this was part of a series.
>
> No response from author, so betting on it and reverting this in isolation
> with your Reported-by.
>

please revert the revert :)

--
With best wishes,
Vladimir