public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Cc: ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org>,
	Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
	Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
	linux-i2c <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ACPI: Force I2C to be selected as a built-in module
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 11:32:31 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ae7f4499-d697-6703-52d5-7ab6d7a4b150@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0h2TOvoNGx5nYU0yVp_GJCxLTStSY=mp2YMbazhfq3x9g@mail.gmail.com>

On 1/25/2018 11:25 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 4:43 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> From: Auger Eric <eric.auger@redhat.com>
>>
>> If I2C is built as a module, ACPI_I2C_OPREGION cannot be set
>> and any ACPI opregion calls targeting I2C fail with no opregion found.
>>
>> Commit da3c6647ee08 ("I2C/ACPI: Clean up I2C ACPI code and Add
>> CONFIG_I2C_ACPI config") says following:
>>
>> "Current there is a race between removing I2C ACPI operation region
>> and ACPI AML code accessing."
>>
>> This patch forces core I2C support to be compiled as a built-in
>> module if ACPI is selected as code is not ready for dynamic module
>> removal.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
>> ---
>>  drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 2 ++
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>> index 4650539..5b48098 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>> @@ -9,6 +9,8 @@ menuconfig ACPI
>>         depends on IA64 || X86 || ARM64
>>         depends on PCI
>>         select PNP
>> +       # force building I2C in on ACPI systems, for opregion availability
>> +       imply I2C
>>         default y if (IA64 || X86)
>>         help
>>           Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) support for
>> --
> 
> I'm not sure how much this helps.
> 
> I2C opregions will only work if the requisite I2C controller driver is
> present anyway and this change doesn't guarantee that AFAIC> 
> OTOH, there are systems using ACPI without I2C opregions, so are we
> really better off by forcing everybody using ACPI to also build I2C?

I was trying to find a good balance by choosing imply instead of select.

If an OS chooses to include an I2C driver as a module (most distros do),
core-i2c functionality becomes a built-in module with ACPI.

If an OS doesn't choose any I2C drivers either built-in/module, then I2C core
functionality wouldn't be selected; right?

> 
> Thanks,
> Rafael
> 


-- 
Sinan Kaya
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-01-25 16:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-25 15:43 [PATCH v3] ACPI: Force I2C to be selected as a built-in module Sinan Kaya
2018-01-25 16:25 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-01-25 16:32   ` Sinan Kaya [this message]
2018-01-25 16:47     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-01-25 16:53       ` Sinan Kaya
2018-01-25 16:57         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-01-25 17:07           ` Sinan Kaya
2018-01-25 17:11             ` Hans de Goede
2018-01-25 17:36   ` Randy Dunlap
2018-02-06 14:25     ` Sinan Kaya
2018-02-08  9:52       ` Rafael J. Wysocki

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=ae7f4499-d697-6703-52d5-7ab6d7a4b150@codeaurora.org \
    --to=okaya@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
    --cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=timur@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
    /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