[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1200446091.26438.3.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:14:51 +0800
From: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
Cc: linux-pci <linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
"Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
"Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH]PCIE ASPM support - takes 2
On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 05:22 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 01:07:02PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > > > +
> > > > +/* Called after ACPI is enabled */
> > > > +static int __init acpi_pcie_support_init(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > + pcie_aspm_init();
> > > > + return 0;
> > > > +}
> > > > +fs_initcall(acpi_pcie_support_init);
> > >
> > > Is there any reason to put this in here instead of just making
> > > pcie_aspm_init an initcall?
> > yes, this will evaluate some ACPI methods, so must be called after ACPI
> > is initialized, which is a sub_system call
>
> I wasn't saying that you should change it from being an fs_initcall. I
> was saying that you might want to consider deleting this function and
> adding
>
> fs_initcall(pcie_aspm_init);
>
> in the file that defines pcie_aspm_init.
I thought we'd better put all ACPI support bits support in one routine
call, like OSC_EXT_PCI_CONFIG_SUPPORT, we didn't do it so far, so I
added a new routine. But I might be over thinking.
Thanks,
Shaohua
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists