From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70C16C388F9 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 13:41:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23ABD2075A for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 13:41:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729424AbgKWNl2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Nov 2020 08:41:28 -0500 Received: from mail-oo1-f66.google.com ([209.85.161.66]:41123 "EHLO mail-oo1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730152AbgKWNl2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Nov 2020 08:41:28 -0500 Received: by mail-oo1-f66.google.com with SMTP id o20so1266969oor.8 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 05:41:27 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Uzg2CWacu4W4GlJ6NBVFRFXDacRPVqyu89NGY2akLvw=; b=aO81D1ecEAkS4h+uqSvK8WEkGWNF+1efmPM7igTq9AEArwgpEMUgzdc3an4eb3JxGJ roHplcQULr0n5KX8h0zAn7616dRTYUnEXdntoJIyEZEynXRqEZ9JWs2T4VVz3JHbTohs uclhZ2B6AciwfZNIqoeVhUZ+hC9dP3IqjJA1XBaMzL3dcb//KcNL6SRR/wnCDIpDDbuJ rfauYOAJDwJDycJhDxaBjxVLzFhAgmUq7d0Frt9PZTuwpef+qZplMzXwvy2gwp7csdjg lyc6OdwTkkxz7qr/D9MOz0OBd9owWUt69lo6D9/HOEh3+2VuI9+oSV/KBB5nbq9v6aNA IgxA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531vDdsdaRW3nntDSh7ct5lqQiqqiwAOUTCjnxRBfWJiBJfBNg/d LJK0NVa4n9PhsmSA1r7gBJh+lJNmYcmRh4thzgA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyHwPjFVmaQhJGxWaY8WxHE4CJyzXYWxLmBB3p57jqGuAJUtGxGbWV4zuLprnIIjQhekAjUXlR21ZPn+l05fMs= X-Received: by 2002:a4a:aac4:: with SMTP id e4mr16385022oon.2.1606138886999; Mon, 23 Nov 2020 05:41:26 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201121203040.146252-1-hdegoede@redhat.com> <20201121203040.146252-6-hdegoede@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 13:41:09 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] ACPI: scan: Add support for deferring adding devices to the second scan phase based on the _DEP list To: Hans de Goede Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Len Brown , ACPI Devel Maling List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 2:31 PM Hans de Goede wrote: > > Hi, > > On 11/23/20 1:17 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 21, 2020 at 9:31 PM Hans de Goede wrote: > >> > >> The current solution, of deferring adding of some devices because they > >> need access during the OpRegions of other devices while they are added, > >> is not very generic. > >> > >> And support for making the decision to defer adding a device based on > >> its _DEP list, instead of the device's HID being in a fixed list of HIDs > >> to defer, which should be a more generic way to deal with this. > > > > Thanks a lot for working on this! > > You're welcome. > > > I'll have a more thorough look at the series later this week, stay tuned. > > Ok. > > >> Since this is likely to cause issues on some hardware, this new method will > >> only be used if the new acpi.defer_scan_based_on_dep kernel commandline > >> option is set to 1. > > > > However, I already can say that I don't like the new command line option. > > You don't like the name, or you don't like having a commandline option for this? The latter. > Anyways I'll wait till you have taken a closer look. OK, thanks!