From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751926AbYCLLeu (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 07:34:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751355AbYCLLek (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 07:34:40 -0400 Received: from fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.36]:38488 "EHLO fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751351AbYCLLej (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 07:34:39 -0400 Message-ID: <47D7BF6C.3080306@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 20:33:00 +0900 From: Kenji Kaneshige User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alex Chiang , Kristen Carlson Accardi , Kenji Kaneshige , Greg KH , Jesse Barnes , Matthew Wilcox , Gary Hade , warthog19@eaglescrag.net, rick.jones2@hp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] ACPI PCI slot detection driver References: <20080229002341.GA21420@ldl.fc.hp.com> <20080301144307.GD24386@parisc-linux.org> <20080304054927.GA15566@suse.de> <200803041018.29035.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> <20080304193036.GB5534@suse.de> <20080304230937.GD3694@ldl.fc.hp.com> <47CDF339.3060304@jp.fujitsu.com> <20080305202052.GN3694@ldl.fc.hp.com> <47D684D0.6060200@jp.fujitsu.com> <20080311110403.7db9527c@appleyard> <20080311191406.GB29344@ldl.fc.hp.com> In-Reply-To: <20080311191406.GB29344@ldl.fc.hp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Alex-san, > On my machine, it is legal to evaluate S1F0._SUN independent of > S1F0._STA because L001._INI has already been evaluated. > > It would be helpful to know what Fujitsu's namespace looks like. > If Fujitsu slot objects contain _STA and _INI, then I agree with > Kenji-san -- I definitely need to check _STA before evaluating > _SUN. Thank you for explanation. Maybe I understood the summary of implementation of HP firmware. But how to use or where to put _INI method in the ACPI namespace never becomes reasonable reason why your driver may ignore _STA before evaluating _SUN. > But in any case, I think both HP and Fujitsu firmware are doing > legal things -- neither firmware is breaking the spec. My understanding of your explanation so far is: - evaluating _SUN without checking _STA doesn't cause problem, from the view point of HP's implementation. - some IBM machine is doing same as HP I never think those are reasonable reasons why ignoring _STA before evaluating _SUN is legal. Am I missing something? > If one list is shorter than the other, then that should be the > list to put in the kernel, and the default behavior should be > "majority rule". I don't want to consider "majority rule" before I understand why ignoring _STA is legal. Thanks, Kenji Kaneshige