From: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>
To: Luca Tettamanti <kronos.it@gmail.com>
Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] RFC: ACPI: Interface for ACPI drivers to place quirk code which gets executed early
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 14:37:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200902041437.40095.trenn@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090202202246.GA9023@dreamland.darkstar.lan>
Hi,
On Monday 02 February 2009 21:22:46 Luca Tettamanti wrote:
> Il Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 06:22:10PM +0100, Thomas Renninger ha scritto:
> > These two patches are tested on a ASUS machine and worked as expected,
> > but probably may still need some cleanup.
>
> I'd keep the DMI+HID approach since it's more flexible:
> - (AFAICS) Thinkpads have different methods for hwmon depending on the
> model and no fixed HID
> - With DMI it would be possible to include ASUS motherboards (ATK w/
> hwmon) but exclude ASUS laptops (ATK w/o hwmon).
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/scan.c b/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> > index c54d7b6..1c25747 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> > @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
> > #include <linux/kthread.h>
> >
> > #include <acpi/acpi_drivers.h>
> > +#include "acpi.h"
> >
> > #define _COMPONENT ACPI_BUS_COMPONENT
> > ACPI_MODULE_NAME("scan");
> > @@ -1562,6 +1563,8 @@ static int __init acpi_scan_init(void)
> >
> > if (result)
> > acpi_device_unregister(acpi_root, ACPI_BUS_REMOVAL_NORMAL);
> > + else
> > + acpi_device_quirks();
>
> Hum, it's not immediatly clear why you put that call in the else
> branch. Maybe put:
>
> if (!result)
> acpi_device_quirks();
>
> before the cleanup?
Looking at this again (and trying to convert the video_detect things into
that) I am not sure whether this is the right place.
While I'd prefer to not touch the video_detect stuff right now because:
- it could easily be extended to provide amount of brightness levels
(I sent test code a while ago) to take them into account into the
native vs ACPI driver decision.
- Therefore it's better to let the drivers call it and not implement
it as a standalone quirk
- It needs the PCI subsystem initialized
Still I like my approach for the ATK (and upcoming similar?) issue(s).
I wonder whether it should be called later still.
Should this be called early, after adding the devices like above or
after PCI acpi and PNP acpi initialization?
Then it needs to be triggered by a separate fs_initcall?
Thomas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-04 13:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-25 21:05 [PATCH] ACPI: add "auto" to acpi_enforce_resources Luca Tettamanti
2009-01-26 8:37 ` Hans de Goede
2009-01-29 10:30 ` Thomas Renninger
2009-01-29 15:16 ` Luca Tettamanti
2009-01-29 16:29 ` Thomas Renninger
2009-01-29 18:58 ` Hans de Goede
2009-01-29 21:31 ` Jean Delvare
2009-01-30 14:29 ` Thomas Renninger
2009-02-01 21:22 ` Luca Tettamanti
2009-02-02 9:11 ` Jean Delvare
2009-02-02 11:38 ` Luca Tettamanti
2009-02-02 17:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] RFC: ACPI: Interface for ACPI drivers to place quirk code which gets executed early Thomas Renninger
2009-02-02 20:22 ` Luca Tettamanti
2009-02-03 13:08 ` Thomas Renninger
2009-02-03 13:45 ` Luca Tettamanti
2009-02-03 14:19 ` Jean Delvare
2009-02-04 13:37 ` Thomas Renninger [this message]
2009-02-02 17:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] RFC: ACPI: Set enforce_resources to strict if a ATK0110 device is found in namespace Thomas Renninger
2009-02-02 20:29 ` Luca Tettamanti
2009-02-02 11:38 ` [PATCH] ACPI: add "auto" to acpi_enforce_resources Thomas Renninger
2009-01-29 21:15 ` Luca Tettamanti
2009-02-04 5:52 ` Len Brown
2009-02-04 6:05 ` Matthew Garrett
2009-02-04 8:37 ` Hans de Goede
2009-02-04 13:17 ` Matthew Garrett
2009-02-04 13:26 ` Jean Delvare
2009-02-04 14:20 ` Matthew Garrett
2009-02-10 13:57 ` Jean Delvare
2009-02-10 14:08 ` Matthew Garrett
2009-02-10 15:32 ` Hans de Goede
2009-02-10 16:24 ` Jean Delvare
2009-02-27 13:27 ` Pavel Machek
2009-03-24 12:39 ` Luca Tettamanti
2009-03-24 13:21 ` Hans de Goede
2009-03-24 13:43 ` Jean Delvare
2009-03-24 14:29 ` Hans de Goede
2009-03-29 20:16 ` Luca Tettamanti
2009-03-29 20:33 ` Pavel Machek
2009-03-29 20:55 ` Jean Delvare
2009-03-29 22:01 ` Luca Tettamanti
2009-03-30 7:36 ` Jean Delvare
2009-04-02 22:59 ` Len Brown
2009-04-03 9:40 ` Jean Delvare
2009-02-12 12:44 ` Jean Delvare
2009-04-02 22:45 ` polling (Re: [PATCH] ACPI: add "auto" to acpi_enforce_resources) Len Brown
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=200902041437.40095.trenn@suse.de \
--to=trenn@suse.de \
--cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
--cc=khali@linux-fr.org \
--cc=kronos.it@gmail.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox