Even after you have admitted that subjective reality precedes material reality in the order of knowledge it remains an unwarranted leap to assume that it precedes it ontologically. Most of all it is unwarranted by common sense which, precisely by its consensual nature, accords a natural precedence to the material, or more precisely to what  qualifies as agreed upon non-subjective reality. Hence the cluster of various kinds of half-way house theories like panpsychism. All of these considerations seem to depend on a notion of the subjective which is already biased towards the objective, that is, on the sort of subjectivity for which there can be more than one ultimate 'I'. And in the same way the kind of objective reality that is posited in these notions is one that is strictly correlative to such an objective-subject. It is only in this kind of pre-scientific framework that something like the 'hard problem' can arise. Contrary to this, if the truly abyssal nature of genuine idealism is once grasped all such conflicts immediately disappear. It is rather like the obverse of the cogito: there cannot even be a doubt as to the 'existence' of the 'I', such a doubt cannot even be formulated. What can be concluded is that because objective reality manifestly exists, therefore all the unfolding mystery of material reality follows, including all the material correlates of objective consciousness.