On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 05:07:10PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> > Hey, if you have patches already, I'll be glad to look at them :) >> >> OK well I'll spin what I have then, but I'm reviewing Wu's solution >> from February as well. I take it we'd want the async_schedule() >> approach rather that one based on kthread_create() right? > > Yes, that would be the best solution.
OK I see why now, the ordering of drivers into domains make sense. >> > And we can't do async for all drivers, we tried that 5+ years ago and >> > lots of things broke, so we need to enable it on a case-by-case basis, >> > unfortunately... >> >> Odd, I only had one thing that didn't come up and it was my keyboard, >> and I think I might know what the issue was. If enabled for all >> drivers would it have been easy to spot issues or was it obscure >> things? My system didn't blow up so I'd like to know what types of >> things blew up. > > It was all sorts of odd machines, not "normal" laptops and desktops from > what I remember. Turns out that the link order really is needed for > lots of embedded systems. We've gotten better now that we have a > deferred probing, but there is still a lot of dependency information in > link order that is needed on some machines. OK thanks, this helps. I'll send what I have now. Luis _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
