From: Rafał Miłecki Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 18:43:05 +0000 (+0000) Subject: bcm53xx: fix loading SPROM content by bcma init change X-Git-Tag: reboot~4340 X-Git-Url: https://git.librecmc.org/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=3dbaab6f67231c9b6683a10e11f2c94041f76be7;p=oweals%2Fopenwrt.git bcm53xx: fix loading SPROM content by bcma init change Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki SVN-Revision: 44367 --- diff --git a/target/linux/bcm53xx/patches-3.14/800-bcma-use-two-different-initcalls-if-built-in.patch b/target/linux/bcm53xx/patches-3.14/800-bcma-use-two-different-initcalls-if-built-in.patch new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..9d229a4c33 --- /dev/null +++ b/target/linux/bcm53xx/patches-3.14/800-bcma-use-two-different-initcalls-if-built-in.patch @@ -0,0 +1,70 @@ +From 666bdfc027cde41a171862dc698987a378c8b66a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 +From: =?UTF-8?q?Rafa=C5=82=20Mi=C5=82ecki?= +Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 18:00:42 +0100 +Subject: [PATCH RFC] bcma: use two different initcalls if built-in +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit + +This is needed as we can't initialize bus during fs_initcall. +Initialization requires SPROM which depends on NVRAM which depends on +mtd. Since mtd, spi, nand, spi-nor use standard module_init, we have to +do the same in bcma. +Without this we'll try to initialize SPROM without having a ready SPROM +proviver registered using bcma_arch_register_fallback_sprom. + +Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki +--- +While this patch seems to work and I can compile bcma as built-in and +module, I'm not too proud of it. I don't really like these #if(n)def +tricks and I'm afraid bcma_modinit may be called even if +bcma_modinit_early failed. + +Do you see any better idea of solving this? +--- + drivers/bcma/main.c | 16 ++++++++++++++-- + 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) + +diff --git a/drivers/bcma/main.c b/drivers/bcma/main.c +index 9635f10..c394207 100644 +--- a/drivers/bcma/main.c ++++ b/drivers/bcma/main.c +@@ -639,13 +639,25 @@ static int bcma_device_uevent(struct device *dev, struct kobj_uevent_env *env) + core->id.rev, core->id.class); + } + ++/* Bus has to be registered early, before any bcma driver */ ++static int __init bcma_modinit_early(void) ++{ ++ return bus_register(&bcma_bus_type); ++} ++#ifndef MODULE ++fs_initcall(bcma_modinit_early); ++#endif ++ ++/* Initialization has to be done later with SPI/mtd/NAND/SPROM available */ + static int __init bcma_modinit(void) + { + int err; + +- err = bus_register(&bcma_bus_type); ++#ifdef MODULE ++ err = bcma_modinit_early(); + if (err) + return err; ++#endif + + err = bcma_host_soc_register_driver(); + if (err) { +@@ -662,7 +674,7 @@ static int __init bcma_modinit(void) + + return err; + } +-fs_initcall(bcma_modinit); ++module_init(bcma_modinit); + + static void __exit bcma_modexit(void) + { +-- +1.8.4.5 + diff --git a/target/linux/bcm53xx/patches-3.18/800-bcma-use-two-different-initcalls-if-built-in.patch b/target/linux/bcm53xx/patches-3.18/800-bcma-use-two-different-initcalls-if-built-in.patch new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..9d229a4c33 --- /dev/null +++ b/target/linux/bcm53xx/patches-3.18/800-bcma-use-two-different-initcalls-if-built-in.patch @@ -0,0 +1,70 @@ +From 666bdfc027cde41a171862dc698987a378c8b66a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 +From: =?UTF-8?q?Rafa=C5=82=20Mi=C5=82ecki?= +Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 18:00:42 +0100 +Subject: [PATCH RFC] bcma: use two different initcalls if built-in +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit + +This is needed as we can't initialize bus during fs_initcall. +Initialization requires SPROM which depends on NVRAM which depends on +mtd. Since mtd, spi, nand, spi-nor use standard module_init, we have to +do the same in bcma. +Without this we'll try to initialize SPROM without having a ready SPROM +proviver registered using bcma_arch_register_fallback_sprom. + +Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki +--- +While this patch seems to work and I can compile bcma as built-in and +module, I'm not too proud of it. I don't really like these #if(n)def +tricks and I'm afraid bcma_modinit may be called even if +bcma_modinit_early failed. + +Do you see any better idea of solving this? +--- + drivers/bcma/main.c | 16 ++++++++++++++-- + 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) + +diff --git a/drivers/bcma/main.c b/drivers/bcma/main.c +index 9635f10..c394207 100644 +--- a/drivers/bcma/main.c ++++ b/drivers/bcma/main.c +@@ -639,13 +639,25 @@ static int bcma_device_uevent(struct device *dev, struct kobj_uevent_env *env) + core->id.rev, core->id.class); + } + ++/* Bus has to be registered early, before any bcma driver */ ++static int __init bcma_modinit_early(void) ++{ ++ return bus_register(&bcma_bus_type); ++} ++#ifndef MODULE ++fs_initcall(bcma_modinit_early); ++#endif ++ ++/* Initialization has to be done later with SPI/mtd/NAND/SPROM available */ + static int __init bcma_modinit(void) + { + int err; + +- err = bus_register(&bcma_bus_type); ++#ifdef MODULE ++ err = bcma_modinit_early(); + if (err) + return err; ++#endif + + err = bcma_host_soc_register_driver(); + if (err) { +@@ -662,7 +674,7 @@ static int __init bcma_modinit(void) + + return err; + } +-fs_initcall(bcma_modinit); ++module_init(bcma_modinit); + + static void __exit bcma_modexit(void) + { +-- +1.8.4.5 +