[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <30a108bc-c85f-55d9-67c5-586534a987c0@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 09:36:47 -0800
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>
Cc: ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>,
Eric Auger <eric.auger@...hat.com>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
linux-i2c <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ACPI: Force I2C to be selected as a built-in module
On 01/25/2018 08:25 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 4:43 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>> From: Auger Eric <eric.auger@...hat.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@...hat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.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 AFAICS.
>
> OTOH, there are systems using ACPI without I2C opregions, so are we
> really better off by forcing everybody using ACPI to also build I2C?
Definitely not.
--
~Randy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists