All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: "Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Cc: "Zhao, Yakui" <yakui.zhao@intel.com>,
	"linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org"
	<linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"stern@rowland.harvard.edu" <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
	"dbrownell@users.sourceforge.net"
	<dbrownell@users.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC 5/5] ACPI GPE based wakeup event detection
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 13:17:50 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200809091317.51125.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <76780B19A496DC4B80439008DAD7076C01AC7F3061@PDSMSX501.ccr.corp.intel.com>

On Tuesday, 9 of September 2008, Li, Shaohua wrote:
> >> > +
> >> >  /**
> >> >   * acpi_bus_notify
> >> >   * ---------------
> >> > @@ -506,6 +519,8 @@ static void acpi_bus_notify(acpi_handle
> >> >     int result = 0;
> >> >     struct acpi_device *device = NULL;
> >> >
> >> > +   blocking_notifier_call_chain(&acpi_bus_notify_list,
> >> > +                   type, (void *)handle);
> >>
> >> Hm, perhaps I'm too tired and I'm missing something obvious, but can you
> >> tell me please why that has to be a notifier chain?  It looks like you
> >add only
> >> one notifier to it, so seemingly it could be replaced by a direct call to
> >a
> >> function like acpi_gpe_pme_handler() (with modified list of arguments).
> >When the notifier chain is used, it can work regardless of whether the
> >CONFIG_ACPI_GPE_WAKEUP is set.
> >If the CONFIG_ACPI_GPE_WAKEUP is set, what you said is also OK.
> I actually had another usage for this (I sent a patchset for docking station, which uses it)
> 
> >> >     if (acpi_bus_get_device(handle, &device))
> >> >             return;
> >> > Index: linux/drivers/acpi/sleep/wakeup.c
> >> > ===================================================================
> >> > --- linux.orig/drivers/acpi/sleep/wakeup.c  2008-09-08
> >14:28:55.000000000 +0800
> >> > +++ linux/drivers/acpi/sleep/wakeup.c       2008-09-08
> >15:04:23.000000000 +0800
> >> > @@ -142,6 +142,70 @@ void acpi_disable_wakeup_device(u8 sleep
> >> >     spin_unlock(&acpi_device_lock);
> >> >  }
> >> >
> >> > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_GPE_WAKEUP
> >> > +static int acpi_gpe_pme_check(struct acpi_device *dev)
> >> > +{
> >> > +   struct device *ldev;
> >> > +
> >> > +   ldev = acpi_get_physical_device(dev->handle);
> >> > +   if (!ldev)
> >> > +           return -ENODEV;
> >> > +   /*
> >> > +    * AML code might already clear the event, so ignore the return
> >value.
> >> > +    * Actually we can't correctly detect which device invokes GPE if
> >the
> >> > +    * event is cleared.
> >> > +    */
> >> > +   if (ldev->bus->pm && ldev->bus->pm->base.wakeup_event)
> >> > +           ldev->bus->pm->base.wakeup_event(ldev);
> >> > +
> >> > +   /*
> >> > +    * We always send the event. AML code usually identifies the exact
> >> > +    * device of the GPE, let's trust it
> >> > +    */
> >> > +   device_receive_wakeup_event(ldev);
> >> > +
> >> > +   put_device(ldev);
> >> > +   return 0;
> >> > +}
> >> > +
> >> > +static int acpi_gpe_pme_handler(struct notifier_block *nb,
> >> > +   unsigned long type, void *data)
> >> > +{
> >> > +   int ret;
> >> > +   acpi_handle handle = data;
> >> > +   struct acpi_device *dev;
> >> > +
> >> > +   if (type != ACPI_NOTIFY_DEVICE_WAKE)
> >> > +           return NOTIFY_DONE;
> >> > +
> >> > +   if (acpi_bus_get_device(handle, &dev))
> >> > +           return NOTIFY_DONE;
> >> > +
> >> > +   ret = acpi_gpe_pme_check(dev);
> >> > +
> >> > +   acpi_disable_gpe(dev->wakeup.gpe_device, dev->wakeup.gpe_number,
> >> > +           ACPI_NOT_ISR);
> >> > +
> >>
> >> At which point are dev->wakeup.gpe_device and dev->wakeup.gpe_number
> >> determined, for example, for PCI devices, and how?
> >In the boot phase a PCI device will be bound with an ACPI device. In the
> >system based on ACPI(GPE) when a PCI device generates a wakeup event, an
> >ACPI interrupt will be triggered and the ACPI AML code will send the
> >device wakeup event to the corresponding ACPI device. In such case we
> >can get the gpe number for the PCI device.
> This is correct. For example:
> 
>             Method (_L07, 0, NotSerialized)
>             {
>                 Notify (\_SB.PCI0.SMBS, 0x02)
>             }
> 
>             Method (_L05, 0, NotSerialized)
>             {
>                 Notify (\_SB.PCI0.MODM, 0x02)
>             }
> 
> GPE 5,7 are wakeup GPEs

Well, it is not clear to me, though, which one of them is associated with the
PME# signal.

Also, the question was what piece of code in the kernel was responsible for the
identification of the wake-up GPEs and for setting dev->wakeup.gpe_device
and dev->wakeup.gpe_number as appropriate.  In particular, how do we figure
out which wake-up GPE will be used for signalling PME# for devices that are
not on-board?

Thanks,
Rafael

  reply	other threads:[~2008-09-09 11:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-09-08  9:19 [RFC 0/5] device wakeup event support shaohua.li
2008-09-08  9:19 ` [RFC 1/5] devcore introduce wakeup_event callback shaohua.li
2008-09-09  2:56   ` David Brownell
2008-09-09  3:49     ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-09  3:49     ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-09  5:26       ` David Brownell
2008-09-09  5:26       ` David Brownell
2008-09-09  8:36         ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-09  8:36         ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-09 11:45           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-09-09 14:22             ` Alan Stern
2008-09-09 14:22             ` Alan Stern
2008-09-09 11:45           ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-09-09 14:18         ` Alan Stern
2008-09-09 14:18         ` Alan Stern
2008-09-09 15:52           ` David Brownell
2008-09-09 15:52           ` David Brownell
2008-09-09 18:39             ` Alan Stern
2008-09-09 18:39             ` Alan Stern
2008-09-09  2:56   ` David Brownell
2008-09-08  9:19 ` shaohua.li
2008-09-08  9:19 ` [RFC 2/5] devcore adds generic wakeup event handler shaohua.li
2008-09-08  9:19 ` shaohua.li
2008-09-08  9:19 ` [RFC 3/5] pci wakeup handler shaohua.li
2008-09-08  9:19 ` shaohua.li
2008-09-08 13:09   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-09-09  1:44     ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-09  1:44     ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-09  2:56       ` David Brownell
2008-09-09  2:56       ` David Brownell
2008-09-09  3:38         ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-09  3:38         ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-08 13:09   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-09-09  2:56   ` David Brownell
2008-09-09  3:33     ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-09  4:04       ` David Brownell
2008-09-09  4:04       ` David Brownell
2008-09-09  3:33     ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-09 11:09     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-09-09 16:18       ` David Brownell
2008-09-09 16:18       ` David Brownell
2008-09-09 11:09     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-09-09  2:56   ` David Brownell
2008-09-08  9:19 ` [RFC 4/5] PCIe native PME detection shaohua.li
2008-09-08  9:19 ` shaohua.li
2008-09-08 21:36   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-09-08 21:36   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-09-09  1:21     ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-09  1:21     ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-08  9:19 ` [RFC 5/5] ACPI GPE based wakeup event detection shaohua.li
2008-09-08  9:19 ` shaohua.li
2008-09-08 20:57   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-09-09  1:13     ` Zhao Yakui
2008-09-09  1:08       ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-09 11:17         ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2008-09-09 11:17         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-09-09  1:08       ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-09 14:08       ` Alan Stern
2008-09-09 14:08       ` Alan Stern
2008-09-09  1:13     ` Zhao Yakui
2008-09-08 20:57   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-09-09  2:41 ` [RFC 0/5] device wakeup event support David Brownell
2008-09-09  3:54   ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-09  3:54   ` Li, Shaohua
2008-09-09  2:41 ` David Brownell
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-09-11  6:30 [RFC 0/5] device wakeup event support v2 Shaohua Li
2008-09-11  6:30 ` [RFC 5/5] ACPI GPE based wakeup event detection Shaohua Li
2008-10-19 20:39   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-10-22  6:51     ` Shaohua Li
2008-10-22 12:12       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-10-22 12:12       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-10-22  6:51     ` Shaohua Li
2008-09-11  6:30 ` Shaohua Li

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200809091317.51125.rjw@sisk.pl \
    --to=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=dbrownell@users.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --cc=yakui.zhao@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.