[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181115190054.GD4179@lahna.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 21:00:54 +0200
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
Cc: Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Jacob jun Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>,
Andreas Noever <andreas.noever@...il.com>,
Michael Jamet <michael.jamet@...el.com>,
Yehezkel Bernat <YehezkelShB@...il.com>,
Christian Kellner <ckellner@...hat.com>,
Mario.Limonciello@...l.com,
Anthony Wong <anthony.wong@...onical.com>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] PCI / ACPI: Identify external PCI devices
On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 05:46:08PM +0000, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> Do you really need to parse it if the dev->is_thunderbolt check is enough ?
Yes, we need to parse it one way or another. dev->is_thunderbolt is
based on heuristics which do not apply anymore when the thing gets
integrated in the SoC.
The _DSD is there already (on existing systems) and is being used by
Windows so I don't understand why we cannot take advantage of it? Every
new system with Thunderbolt ports will have it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists