From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Len Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4]Bind physical devices with ACPI devices - take 2 Date: 05 Jan 2005 23:00:55 -0500 Message-ID: <1104984055.18173.239.camel@d845pe> References: <1104893444.5550.127.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1104893444.5550.127.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Shaohua Li Cc: ACPI Developers , lkml , Greg , Patrick Mochel , Pavel Machek , Adam Belay List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 21:50, Li Shaohua wrote: > Hi, > The series of patches implement binding physical devices with ACPI > devices. With it, device drivers can utilize methods provided by > firmware (ACPI). These patches are against 2.6.10, please give your > comments. I think we'll save some significant power when ACPI D-states are invoked for the devices that supply them. While many PCI devices support PCI power management and thus don't need/use ACPI D-states, I think it will be even more important to add this functionality to the legacy devices which never have PCI power management and thus always depend on ACPI for D-states. It looks like some device drivers scribble on dev->platform_data; and we need to fix those drivers before deploying this patch. Alternatively, we could add a new field to struct device, but then we'd probably never get rid of it... I'm a little unformforable with platform_notify and platform_notify_remove available as globals. We should probably BUG_ON if we find them set before ACPI writes on them. We'll need to update this patch to handle erroneous but real platforms that don't have _BBN by using _CRS to get PCI bus number. Unclear to me if/how this association of ACPI capability should be reflected in the sysfs device tree. thanks, -Len