[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5077F407.3040205@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 18:42:15 +0800
From: Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
To: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...wei.com>
CC: yinghai@...nel.org, lenb@...nel.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Do not use acpi_device to find pci root bridge in
_init code.
On 10/12/2012 06:36 PM, Jiang Liu wrote:
> On 2012-10-12 18:31, Tang Chen wrote:
>> When the kernel is being initialized, and some hardwares are not added
>> to system, there won't be acpi_device structs for these devices. But
>> acpi_is_root_bridge() depends on acpi_device struct. As a result, all
>> the not-added root bridge will not be judged as a root bridge in
>> find_root_bridges(). And further more, no handle_hotplug_event_root()
>> notifier will be installed for them.
>>
>> This patch introduces a new api to find all root bridges in system by
>> getting HID directly from ACPI namespace, not depending on acpi_device
>> struct.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tang Chen<tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/acpi/pci_root.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>> 1 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
>> index 7d0fb03..3819bee 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
>> @@ -128,9 +128,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_get_pci_rootbridge_handle);
>> /**
>> * acpi_is_root_bridge - determine whether an ACPI CA node is a PCI root bridge
>> * @handle - the ACPI CA node in question.
>> - *
>> - * Note: we could make this API take a struct acpi_device * instead, but
>> - * for now, it's more convenient to operate on an acpi_handle.
>> */
>> int acpi_is_root_bridge(acpi_handle handle)
>> {
>> @@ -138,8 +135,28 @@ int acpi_is_root_bridge(acpi_handle handle)
>> struct acpi_device *device;
>>
>> ret = acpi_bus_get_device(handle,&device);
>> - if (ret)
>> - return 0;
>> + if (ret) {
>> + /**
>> + * If a device is not added to the system yet, there won't be
>> + * an acpi_device struct for it. But it doesn't mean it is not
>> + * a PCI root bridge. In this case we need to get HID and CID
>> + * from ACPI namespace directly.
>> + */
>> + struct acpi_device_info *info;
>> + acpi_status status;
>> + status = acpi_get_object_info(handle,&info);
>> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
>> + printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX "%s: Error reading"
>> + "device info\n", __func__);
>> + return 0;
>> + }
>> +
>> + ret = acpi_match_object_info_ids(info, root_device_ids);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return 0;
>> + else
>> + return 1;
>> + }
> I have sent a similar patch to Yinghai before. For simplicity, we could
> use acpi_match_object_info_ids() instead of acpi_match_device_ids()
> directly.
Hum, I must have missed it. :)
Using acpi_match_object_info_ids() directly seems good. I'm just worry
about if it could cause any other problem. :)
So now, is this bug fixed ? And we don't need these patches, right ?
Thanks. :)
> Thanks!
> Gerry
>
>>
>> ret = acpi_match_device_ids(device, root_device_ids);
>> if (ret)
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
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