From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yijing Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] ACPI: Replace struct acpi_bus_ops with enum type Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 22:34:48 +0800 Message-ID: <50C89608.7050908@gmail.com> References: <8498184.VilrUmatxI@vostro.rjw.lan> <50C74C92.1040405@gmail.com> <2093499.q2b9fD3smR@vostro.rjw.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <2093499.q2b9fD3smR@vostro.rjw.lan> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Jiang Liu , Yinghai Lu , Jiang Liu , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Bjorn Helgaas , LKML , ACPI Devel Maling List , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Toshi Kani , Myron Stowe List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org =E4=BA=8E 2012-12-12 2:30, Rafael J. Wysocki =E5=86=99=E9=81=93: > Hi Gerry, >=20 > On Tuesday, December 11, 2012 11:09:06 PM Jiang Liu wrote: >> Hi Rafael, >> I have worked out a patch set to clean up ACPI/PCI related notifica= tions, >> please refer to >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-pci/msg17822.html >> The patchset doesn't apply cleanly to Bjorn's latest pci-next tree.= I will >> help to rebase it if needed. >=20 > I have reviewed the patches and I think they make sense overall. How= ever, > the statement that acpi_pci_bind()/acpi_pci_unbind() are used to main= tain > PCI-ACPI binding relationships is quite inaccurate, because all what = these > functions do is to (1) add/remove ACPI PM notifiers to/from PCI devic= es and > (2) retrieve the _PRT information for bridges from ACPI tables. In f= act, > the *binding* itself is managed by the code in drivers/acpi/glue.c. >=20 > Also, please have a look at my suggestion in the last reply to Yingha= i: >=20 > http://marc.info/?l=3Dlinux-pci&m=3D135522965707752&w=3D2 >=20 > In fact, I think we can go even further than that. Namely, if we pop= ulate the > ACPI handle of the device in pci_scan_device(), then we can just move= the PM > notifier and wakeup setup to platform_pci_wakeup_init(), where it sho= uld be > (we'll also need to add a corresponding _exit() function, then, but t= hat'll be > much cleaner anyway). >=20 > Then, the remaining thing would be to ensure that _PRT entries are pa= rsed > as appropriate somewhere around pci_init_capabilities(). >=20 > Also, I wonder if you can help test the $subject patchset on a system= with > hardware PCI hotplug (preferably on top of the linux-pm.git/master br= anch)? >=20 Hi Rafael, We are doing test for this series patches, I will send out the test = result as soon. Thanks! Yijing