* linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
@ 2012-11-06 2:48 Stephen Rothwell
2012-11-06 16:52 ` Bjorn Helgaas
0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2012-11-06 2:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Bjorn Helgaas, Feng Tang
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1331 bytes --]
Hi Rafael,
Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
arch/x86/pci/acpi.c between commit 3f385fa9edce ("x86/PCI: Ignore _SEG on
HP xw9300") from the pci tree and commit 97a7108a3c00 ("ACPI / x86: Add
quirk for "CheckPoint P-20-00" to not use bridge _CRS_ info") from the pm
tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
diff --cc arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
index 49e5195,7010c19..0000000
--- a/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
+++ b/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
@@@ -106,16 -98,16 +106,27 @@@ static const struct dmi_system_id pci_c
DMI_MATCH(DMI_BIOS_VERSION, "6JET85WW (1.43 )"),
},
},
+
+ /* https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15362 */
+ {
+ .callback = set_ignore_seg,
+ .ident = "HP xw9300",
+ .matches = {
+ DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Hewlett-Packard"),
+ DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "HP xw9300 Workstation"),
+ },
+ },
++
+ /* https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47981 */
+ {
+ .callback = set_nouse_crs,
+ .ident = "CheckPoint P-20-00",
+ .matches = {
+ DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "CheckPoint"),
+ DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "P-20-00"),
+ DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "Bridgeport"),
+ },
+ },
{}
};
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
2012-11-06 2:48 linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree Stephen Rothwell
@ 2012-11-06 16:52 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2012-11-16 10:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread
From: Bjorn Helgaas @ 2012-11-06 16:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki, linux-next, linux-kernel, Feng Tang
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
> arch/x86/pci/acpi.c between commit 3f385fa9edce ("x86/PCI: Ignore _SEG on
> HP xw9300") from the pci tree and commit 97a7108a3c00 ("ACPI / x86: Add
> quirk for "CheckPoint P-20-00" to not use bridge _CRS_ info") from the pm
> tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).
My opinion was that we should just drop the CheckPoint quirk. See
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47981#c36 for my
rationale.
The changelog of the quirk leaves the wrong impression:
This is to fix a regression
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47981
The CheckPoint P-20-00 works ok before new machines (2008 and later) are
forced to use the bridge _CRS info by default in 2.6.34. Add this quirk
to restore its old way of working: not using bridge _CRS info.
This is NOT a regression, at least not in the usual sense. The
CheckPoint BIOS has a serious defect that corrupts part of the DSDT.
It happened that things "worked" when we ignored the _CRS that was
corrupted (other things are almost certainly broken, but we don't know
what they are yet). And it's not a question of being "forced" to use
the bridge _CRS. Every system SHOULD be using _CRS; that's the only
way we can correctly manage resources of ACPI devices.
But if you (Rafael) decide we should keep this, I won't object.
The conflict resolution looks fine to me.
> diff --cc arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
> index 49e5195,7010c19..0000000
> --- a/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/pci/acpi.c
> @@@ -106,16 -98,16 +106,27 @@@ static const struct dmi_system_id pci_c
> DMI_MATCH(DMI_BIOS_VERSION, "6JET85WW (1.43 )"),
> },
> },
> +
> + /* https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15362 */
> + {
> + .callback = set_ignore_seg,
> + .ident = "HP xw9300",
> + .matches = {
> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Hewlett-Packard"),
> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "HP xw9300 Workstation"),
> + },
> + },
> ++
> + /* https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47981 */
> + {
> + .callback = set_nouse_crs,
> + .ident = "CheckPoint P-20-00",
> + .matches = {
> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "CheckPoint"),
> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "P-20-00"),
> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "Bridgeport"),
> + },
> + },
> {}
> };
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
2012-11-06 16:52 ` Bjorn Helgaas
@ 2012-11-16 10:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2012-11-16 10:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bjorn Helgaas; +Cc: Stephen Rothwell, linux-next, linux-kernel, Feng Tang
On Tuesday, November 06, 2012 09:52:40 AM Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > Hi Rafael,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
> > arch/x86/pci/acpi.c between commit 3f385fa9edce ("x86/PCI: Ignore _SEG on
> > HP xw9300") from the pci tree and commit 97a7108a3c00 ("ACPI / x86: Add
> > quirk for "CheckPoint P-20-00" to not use bridge _CRS_ info") from the pm
> > tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> > is required).
>
> My opinion was that we should just drop the CheckPoint quirk. See
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47981#c36 for my
> rationale.
OK, I agree. I'll revert that commit, then.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
@ 2013-01-10 0:28 Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-10 13:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-01-10 0:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Yinghai Lu, Bjorn Helgaas
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1503 bytes --]
Hi Rafael,
Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
drivers/acpi/pci_root.c between commit 3c449ed00759 ("PCI/ACPI: Reserve
firmware-allocated resources for hot-added root buses") from the pci tree
and commit 47525cda88f5 ("ACPI / PCI: Fold acpi_pci_root_start() into
acpi_pci_root_add()") from the pm tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
diff --cc drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
index dcbe966,22a8458..0000000
--- a/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
@@@ -632,28 -600,8 +600,10 @@@ static int acpi_pci_root_add(struct acp
if (device->wakeup.flags.run_wake)
device_set_run_wake(root->bus->bridge, true);
- return 0;
-
- out_del_root:
- mutex_lock(&acpi_pci_root_lock);
- list_del(&root->node);
- mutex_unlock(&acpi_pci_root_lock);
-
- acpi_pci_irq_del_prt(root->segment, root->secondary.start);
- end:
- kfree(root);
- return result;
- }
-
- static int acpi_pci_root_start(struct acpi_device *device)
- {
- struct acpi_pci_root *root = acpi_driver_data(device);
- struct acpi_pci_driver *driver;
-
- if (system_state != SYSTEM_BOOTING)
+ if (system_state != SYSTEM_BOOTING) {
+ pcibios_resource_survey_bus(root->bus);
pci_assign_unassigned_bus_resources(root->bus);
+ }
mutex_lock(&acpi_pci_root_lock);
list_for_each_entry(driver, &acpi_pci_drivers, node)
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
2013-01-10 0:28 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2013-01-10 13:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-01-10 18:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas
0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2013-01-10 13:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Yinghai Lu, Bjorn Helgaas
Hi,
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 11:28:36 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
> drivers/acpi/pci_root.c between commit 3c449ed00759 ("PCI/ACPI: Reserve
> firmware-allocated resources for hot-added root buses") from the pci tree
> and commit 47525cda88f5 ("ACPI / PCI: Fold acpi_pci_root_start() into
> acpi_pci_root_add()") from the pm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).
Thanks for the fixup and please carry it for now (the conflict should go away
when Bjorn pulls from my acpi-scan branch).
Thanks,
Rafael
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
2013-01-10 13:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2013-01-10 18:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas
0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread
From: Bjorn Helgaas @ 2013-01-10 18:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: Stephen Rothwell, linux-next, linux-kernel, Yinghai Lu
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 6:12 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thursday, January 10, 2013 11:28:36 AM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi Rafael,
>>
>> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
>> drivers/acpi/pci_root.c between commit 3c449ed00759 ("PCI/ACPI: Reserve
>> firmware-allocated resources for hot-added root buses") from the pci tree
>> and commit 47525cda88f5 ("ACPI / PCI: Fold acpi_pci_root_start() into
>> acpi_pci_root_add()") from the pm tree.
>>
>> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
>> is required).
>
> Thanks for the fixup and please carry it for now (the conflict should go away
> when Bjorn pulls from my acpi-scan branch).
I pulled from acpi-scan and put it in my -next branch.
I had done this yesterday, but botched the conflict resolution
(thanks, Stephen, for showing me the correct resolution). So I
recreated my pci/yinghai-survey-resources+acpi-scan branch, re-did the
merge, the force-updated both my
pci/yinghai-survey-resources+acpi-scan and next branches.
Bjorn
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
@ 2013-01-30 8:35 Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-30 12:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-01-30 8:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Yinghai Lu, Bjorn Helgaas
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 858 bytes --]
Hi Rafael,
Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
drivers/acpi/internal.h between commit 668192b67820 ("PCI: acpiphp: Move
host bridge hotplug to pci_root.c") from the pci tree and commit
2c545601d933 ("ACPI / PCI: Make PCI root driver use struct
acpi_scan_handler") from the pm tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
diff --cc drivers/acpi/internal.h
index 0f24148,0d1397d..0000000
--- a/drivers/acpi/internal.h
+++ b/drivers/acpi/internal.h
@@@ -67,8 -89,6 +89,7 @@@ struct acpi_ec
extern struct acpi_ec *first_ec;
- int acpi_pci_root_init(void);
+void acpi_pci_root_hp_init(void);
int acpi_ec_init(void);
int acpi_ec_ecdt_probe(void);
int acpi_boot_ec_enable(void);
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
2013-01-30 8:35 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2013-01-30 12:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2013-01-30 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Yinghai Lu, Bjorn Helgaas
Hi,
On Wednesday, January 30, 2013 07:35:51 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
> drivers/acpi/internal.h between commit 668192b67820 ("PCI: acpiphp: Move
> host bridge hotplug to pci_root.c") from the pci tree and commit
> 2c545601d933 ("ACPI / PCI: Make PCI root driver use struct
> acpi_scan_handler") from the pm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).
Thanks for resolving the conflict, that's the right fix.
Rafael
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
@ 2013-02-15 1:23 Stephen Rothwell
2013-02-15 12:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-02-15 1:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki
Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Yinghai Lu, Bjorn Helgaas, Jiang Liu
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2569 bytes --]
Hi Rafael,
Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got conflicts in
drivers/acpi/scan.c and drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c between
commits 668192b67820 ("PCI: acpiphp: Move host bridge hotplug to
pci_root.c") and be6d2867b4f6 ("PCI: acpiphp: Remove dead code for PCI
host bridge hotplug") from the pci tree and commit 3757b94802fb ("ACPI /
hotplug: Fix concurrency issues and memory leaks") from the pm tree.
I fixed it up (thanks to Yinghai Lu for the resolution - see below) and
can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
diff --cc drivers/acpi/scan.c
index a363f87,daee749..0000000
--- a/drivers/acpi/scan.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/scan.c
@@@ -1707,7 -1804,7 +1804,9 @@@ int __init acpi_scan_init(void
acpi_update_all_gpes();
+ acpi_pci_root_hp_init();
+
- return 0;
+ out:
+ mutex_unlock(&acpi_scan_lock);
+ return result;
}
diff --cc drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c
index 4681d2c,a951c22..0000000
--- a/drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c
@@@ -1136,11 -1214,29 +1132,13 @@@ static void _handle_hotplug_event_bridg
acpi_handle handle;
u32 type;
- hp_work = container_of(work, struct acpiphp_hp_work, work);
+ hp_work = container_of(work, struct acpi_hp_work, work);
handle = hp_work->handle;
type = hp_work->type;
+ bridge = (struct acpiphp_bridge *)hp_work->context;
+ acpi_scan_lock_acquire();
+
- if (acpi_bus_get_device(handle, &device)) {
- /* This bridge must have just been physically inserted */
- handle_bridge_insertion(handle, type);
- goto out;
- }
-
- bridge = acpiphp_handle_to_bridge(handle);
- if (type == ACPI_NOTIFY_BUS_CHECK) {
- acpi_walk_namespace(ACPI_TYPE_DEVICE, handle, ACPI_UINT32_MAX,
- count_sub_bridges, NULL, &num_sub_bridges, NULL);
- }
-
- if (!bridge && !num_sub_bridges) {
- err("cannot get bridge info\n");
- goto out;
- }
-
acpi_get_name(handle, ACPI_FULL_PATHNAME, &buffer);
switch (type) {
@@@ -1195,6 -1296,8 +1193,7 @@@
break;
}
-out:
+ acpi_scan_lock_release();
kfree(hp_work); /* allocated in handle_hotplug_event_bridge */
}
@@@ -1237,6 -1342,10 +1236,8 @@@ static void _handle_hotplug_event_func(
acpi_get_name(handle, ACPI_FULL_PATHNAME, &buffer);
- func = (struct acpiphp_func *)context;
-
+ acpi_scan_lock_acquire();
+
switch (type) {
case ACPI_NOTIFY_BUS_CHECK:
/* bus re-enumerate */
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
2013-02-15 1:23 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2013-02-15 12:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2013-02-15 12:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Yinghai Lu, Bjorn Helgaas, Jiang Liu
On Friday, February 15, 2013 12:23:13 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got conflicts in
> drivers/acpi/scan.c and drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c between
> commits 668192b67820 ("PCI: acpiphp: Move host bridge hotplug to
> pci_root.c") and be6d2867b4f6 ("PCI: acpiphp: Remove dead code for PCI
> host bridge hotplug") from the pci tree and commit 3757b94802fb ("ACPI /
> hotplug: Fix concurrency issues and memory leaks") from the pm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (thanks to Yinghai Lu for the resolution - see below) and
> can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required).
Thanks Stephen!
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
@ 2013-02-18 1:11 Stephen Rothwell
2013-02-18 12:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-02-18 1:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki
Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Yinghai Lu, Bjorn Helgaas, Jiang Liu
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1072 bytes --]
Hi Rafael,
Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
drivers/acpi/internal.h between commits 668192b67820 ("PCI: acpiphp: Move
host bridge hotplug to pci_root.c") and ab1a2e038ff2 ("ACPI / PCI: Make
pci_slot built-in only, not a module") from the pci tree and commit
00c43b968250 ("ACPI / PCI: Make PCI root driver use struct
acpi_scan_handler") from the pm tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
diff --cc drivers/acpi/internal.h
index e09ce03,7909232..0000000
--- a/drivers/acpi/internal.h
+++ b/drivers/acpi/internal.h
@@@ -67,13 -94,6 +94,12 @@@ struct acpi_ec
extern struct acpi_ec *first_ec;
+#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_PCI_SLOT
+void acpi_pci_slot_init(void);
+#else
+static inline void acpi_pci_slot_init(void) { }
+#endif
- int acpi_pci_root_init(void);
+void acpi_pci_root_hp_init(void);
int acpi_ec_init(void);
int acpi_ec_ecdt_probe(void);
int acpi_boot_ec_enable(void);
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
2013-02-18 1:11 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2013-02-18 12:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2013-02-18 12:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Yinghai Lu, Bjorn Helgaas, Jiang Liu
Hi Stephen,
On Monday, February 18, 2013 12:11:05 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
> drivers/acpi/internal.h between commits 668192b67820 ("PCI: acpiphp: Move
> host bridge hotplug to pci_root.c") and ab1a2e038ff2 ("ACPI / PCI: Make
> pci_slot built-in only, not a module") from the pci tree and commit
> 00c43b968250 ("ACPI / PCI: Make PCI root driver use struct
> acpi_scan_handler") from the pm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).
Thanks for the notice and the fix.
Rafael
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
@ 2013-02-18 1:17 Stephen Rothwell
2013-02-18 12:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-02-18 1:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki
Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Jiang Liu, Bjorn Helgaas, Yinghai Lu
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1351 bytes --]
Hi Rafael,
Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
drivers/acpi/scan.c between commits 668192b67820 ("PCI: acpiphp: Move
host bridge hotplug to pci_root.c") and ab1a2e038ff2 ("ACPI / PCI: Make
pci_slot built-in only, not a module") from the pci tree and commits
4daeaf68379f ("ACPI / PCI: Make PCI IRQ link driver use struct
acpi_scan_handler") and 3757b94802fb ("ACPI / hotplug: Fix concurrency
issues and memory leaks") from the pm tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
diff --cc drivers/acpi/scan.c
index d9ee41e,daee749..0000000
--- a/drivers/acpi/scan.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/scan.c
@@@ -1685,10 -1778,13 +1778,14 @@@ int __init acpi_scan_init(void
printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX "Could not register bus type\n");
}
- acpi_power_init();
acpi_pci_root_init();
+ acpi_pci_slot_init();
+ acpi_pci_link_init();
+ acpi_platform_init();
+ acpi_csrt_init();
+ acpi_container_init();
+ mutex_lock(&acpi_scan_lock);
/*
* Enumerate devices in the ACPI namespace.
*/
@@@ -1708,7 -1804,7 +1805,9 @@@
acpi_update_all_gpes();
+ acpi_pci_root_hp_init();
+
- return 0;
+ out:
+ mutex_unlock(&acpi_scan_lock);
+ return result;
}
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
2013-02-18 1:17 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2013-02-18 12:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2013-02-18 12:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Jiang Liu, Bjorn Helgaas, Yinghai Lu
Hi Stephen,
On Monday, February 18, 2013 12:17:07 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
> drivers/acpi/scan.c between commits 668192b67820 ("PCI: acpiphp: Move
> host bridge hotplug to pci_root.c") and ab1a2e038ff2 ("ACPI / PCI: Make
> pci_slot built-in only, not a module") from the pci tree and commits
> 4daeaf68379f ("ACPI / PCI: Make PCI IRQ link driver use struct
> acpi_scan_handler") and 3757b94802fb ("ACPI / hotplug: Fix concurrency
> issues and memory leaks") from the pm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).
Thanks for the notice and the fix (which is the right one).
Rafael
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
@ 2013-02-20 1:55 Stephen Rothwell
2013-02-20 12:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-02-20 1:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Yinghai Lu, Bjorn Helgaas
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2045 bytes --]
Hi Rafael,
Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
drivers/pci/pci-acpi.c between commit 181380b702ee ("PCI/ACPI: Don't
cache _PRT, and don't associate them with bus numbers") from the pci tree
and commit bc9b6407bd6d ("ACPI / PM: Rework the handling of devices
depending on power resources") from the pm tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
diff --cc drivers/pci/pci-acpi.c
index c685ff5,e407c61..0000000
--- a/drivers/pci/pci-acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/pci-acpi.c
@@@ -307,8 -325,26 +307,7 @@@ static void pci_acpi_setup(struct devic
struct pci_dev *pci_dev = to_pci_dev(dev);
acpi_handle handle = ACPI_HANDLE(dev);
struct acpi_device *adev;
- acpi_status status;
- acpi_handle dummy;
-
- /*
- * Evaluate and parse _PRT, if exists. This code allows parsing of
- * _PRT objects within the scope of non-bridge devices. Note that
- * _PRTs within the scope of a PCI bridge assume the bridge's
- * subordinate bus number.
- *
- * TBD: Can _PRTs exist within the scope of non-bridge PCI devices?
- */
- status = acpi_get_handle(handle, METHOD_NAME__PRT, &dummy);
- if (ACPI_SUCCESS(status)) {
- unsigned char bus;
-
- bus = pci_dev->subordinate ?
- pci_dev->subordinate->number : pci_dev->bus->number;
- acpi_pci_irq_add_prt(handle, pci_domain_nr(pci_dev->bus), bus);
- }
- acpi_power_resource_register_device(dev, handle);
if (acpi_bus_get_device(handle, &adev) || !adev->wakeup.flags.valid)
return;
@@@ -330,7 -367,10 +329,6 @@@ static void pci_acpi_cleanup(struct dev
device_set_run_wake(dev, false);
pci_acpi_remove_pm_notifier(adev);
}
- acpi_power_resource_unregister_device(dev, handle);
-
- if (pci_dev->subordinate)
- acpi_pci_irq_del_prt(pci_domain_nr(pci_dev->bus),
- pci_dev->subordinate->number);
}
static struct acpi_bus_type acpi_pci_bus = {
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
2013-02-20 1:55 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2013-02-20 12:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2013-02-20 12:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Yinghai Lu, Bjorn Helgaas
Hi,
On Wednesday, February 20, 2013 12:55:55 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
> drivers/pci/pci-acpi.c between commit 181380b702ee ("PCI/ACPI: Don't
> cache _PRT, and don't associate them with bus numbers") from the pci tree
> and commit bc9b6407bd6d ("ACPI / PM: Rework the handling of devices
> depending on power resources") from the pm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).
Thanks for the notice and fix.
Rafael
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
@ 2013-04-16 2:46 Stephen Rothwell
2013-04-16 17:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-04-16 2:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Jiang Liu, Bjorn Helgaas
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 931 bytes --]
Hi Rafael,
Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
drivers/acpi/scan.c between commit 5c0b04e3d913 ("PCI/ACPI: Handle PCI
slot devices when creating/destroying PCI buses") from the pci tree and
commit 0a34764411aa ("ACPI / scan: Make memory hotplug driver use struct
acpi_scan_handler") from the pm tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
diff --cc drivers/acpi/scan.c
index f54d198,d7f3c8b..0000000
--- a/drivers/acpi/scan.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/scan.c
@@@ -1788,8 -2041,11 +2041,10 @@@ int __init acpi_scan_init(void
acpi_pci_root_init();
acpi_pci_link_init();
acpi_platform_init();
+ acpi_lpss_init();
acpi_csrt_init();
acpi_container_init();
- acpi_pci_slot_init();
+ acpi_memory_hotplug_init();
mutex_lock(&acpi_scan_lock);
/*
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
2013-04-16 2:46 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2013-04-16 17:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2013-04-16 17:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Jiang Liu, Bjorn Helgaas
On Tuesday, April 16, 2013 12:46:11 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
> drivers/acpi/scan.c between commit 5c0b04e3d913 ("PCI/ACPI: Handle PCI
> slot devices when creating/destroying PCI buses") from the pci tree and
> commit 0a34764411aa ("ACPI / scan: Make memory hotplug driver use struct
> acpi_scan_handler") from the pm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
> is required).
The fix look correct, thanks a lot for taking care of this!
Rafael
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
@ 2013-06-27 3:02 Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2013-06-27 3:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki; +Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Bjorn Helgaas, Lv Zheng
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 909 bytes --]
Hi Rafael,
Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in MAINTAINERS
between commit 15fd830dd310 ("MAINTAINERS: Add ACPI folks for
ACPI-related things under drivers/pci") from the pci tree and commit
994b942fb4eb ("ACPI: Update MAINTAINERS file to include
Documentation/acpi") from the pm tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action
is required).
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
diff --cc MAINTAINERS
index 6f30491,04a5fef..0000000
--- a/MAINTAINERS
+++ b/MAINTAINERS
@@@ -247,9 -242,8 +247,11 @@@ F: drivers/acpi
F: drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/
F: include/linux/acpi.h
F: include/acpi/
+F: drivers/pci/*acpi*
+F: drivers/pci/*/*acpi*
+F: drivers/pci/*/*/*acpi*
+ F: Documentation/acpi
+ F: Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-acpi
ACPI FAN DRIVER
M: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
@ 2015-02-11 1:07 Stephen Rothwell
2015-02-11 1:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2015-02-11 1:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki, Bjorn Helgaas
Cc: linux-next, linux-kernel, Lorenzo Pieralisi
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 707 bytes --]
Hi Rafael,
Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
drivers/of/of_pci.c between commit d2be00c0fb5a ("of/pci: Free
resources on failure in of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources()") from the
pci tree and commit 5c493df25a0d ("Merge branch 'pci/host-generic' of
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci into
acpi-resources") from the pm tree.
I fixed it up (I just use the latter version, please check when it
comes out) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required,
though someone might want to tell Linus how to resolve it - including
the removal of the "kfree(bus_range);").
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
2015-02-11 1:07 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2015-02-11 1:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-11 2:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2015-02-11 1:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas, linux-next, linux-kernel, Lorenzo Pieralisi
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1036 bytes --]
On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 12:07:55 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
> drivers/of/of_pci.c between commit d2be00c0fb5a ("of/pci: Free
> resources on failure in of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources()") from the
> pci tree and commit 5c493df25a0d ("Merge branch 'pci/host-generic' of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci into
> acpi-resources") from the pm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I just use the latter version, please check when it
> comes out) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required,
> though someone might want to tell Linus how to resolve it - including
> the removal of the "kfree(bus_range);").
Sorry, I messed this up. The commit that supposed to be a merge ended
up as a non-merge commit in my tree, just because I tried to modify
the changelog of it without doing the merge again.
Then, I should have noticed that when I was putting together the pull request
for Linus earlier today, but then I didn't.
Rafael
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
2015-02-11 1:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2015-02-11 2:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-11 2:05 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 27+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2015-02-11 2:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell, Lorenzo Pieralisi
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas, linux-next, linux-kernel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1484 bytes --]
On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 02:41:35 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 12:07:55 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Rafael,
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
> > drivers/of/of_pci.c between commit d2be00c0fb5a ("of/pci: Free
> > resources on failure in of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources()") from the
> > pci tree and commit 5c493df25a0d ("Merge branch 'pci/host-generic' of
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci into
> > acpi-resources") from the pm tree.
> >
> > I fixed it up (I just use the latter version, please check when it
> > comes out) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required,
> > though someone might want to tell Linus how to resolve it - including
> > the removal of the "kfree(bus_range);").
>
> Sorry, I messed this up. The commit that supposed to be a merge ended
> up as a non-merge commit in my tree, just because I tried to modify
> the changelog of it without doing the merge again.
>
> Then, I should have noticed that when I was putting together the pull request
> for Linus earlier today, but then I didn't.
Linus merged my tree and the PCI one already, but his conflict resolution
didn't remove the kfree(bus_range); line, so it looks like we'll need a
separate patch removing it.
Lorenzo, will you send it or should I prepare one?
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
2015-02-11 2:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2015-02-11 2:05 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi @ 2015-02-11 2:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki
Cc: Stephen Rothwell, Bjorn Helgaas, linux-next, linux-kernel
Hi Rafael,
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 02:03:49AM +0000, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 02:41:35 AM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 12:07:55 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi Rafael,
> > >
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in
> > > drivers/of/of_pci.c between commit d2be00c0fb5a ("of/pci: Free
> > > resources on failure in of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources()") from the
> > > pci tree and commit 5c493df25a0d ("Merge branch 'pci/host-generic' of
> > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci into
> > > acpi-resources") from the pm tree.
> > >
> > > I fixed it up (I just use the latter version, please check when it
> > > comes out) and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required,
> > > though someone might want to tell Linus how to resolve it - including
> > > the removal of the "kfree(bus_range);").
> >
> > Sorry, I messed this up. The commit that supposed to be a merge ended
> > up as a non-merge commit in my tree, just because I tried to modify
> > the changelog of it without doing the merge again.
> >
> > Then, I should have noticed that when I was putting together the pull request
> > for Linus earlier today, but then I didn't.
>
> Linus merged my tree and the PCI one already, but his conflict resolution
> didn't remove the kfree(bus_range); line, so it looks like we'll need a
> separate patch removing it.
>
> Lorenzo, will you send it or should I prepare one?
I will send the patch myself sorry for the churn.
Thank you,
Lorenzo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
@ 2019-07-01 3:24 Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2019-07-01 3:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki, Bjorn Helgaas
Cc: Linux Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab, Viresh Kumar
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7448 bytes --]
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.rst
between commits:
151f4e2bdc7a ("docs: power: convert docs to ReST and rename to *.rst")
562fe2ef1a21 ("PM / QOS: Pass request type to dev_pm_qos_read_value()")
from the pci tree and commit:
0c4899702720 ("PM / QOS: Pass request type to dev_pm_qos_{add|remove}_notifier()")
from the pm tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.rst
index 945fc6d760c9,cfcb1df39799..000000000000
--- a/Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.rst
+++ b/Documentation/power/pm_qos_interface.rst
@@@ -113,76 -107,72 +113,78 @@@ the aggregated value does not require a
From kernel mode the use of this interface is the following:
int dev_pm_qos_add_request(device, handle, type, value):
-Will insert an element into the list for that identified device with the
-target value. Upon change to this list the new target is recomputed and any
-registered notifiers are called only if the target value is now different.
-Clients of dev_pm_qos need to save the handle for future use in other
-dev_pm_qos API functions.
+ Will insert an element into the list for that identified device with the
+ target value. Upon change to this list the new target is recomputed and any
+ registered notifiers are called only if the target value is now different.
+ Clients of dev_pm_qos need to save the handle for future use in other
+ dev_pm_qos API functions.
int dev_pm_qos_update_request(handle, new_value):
-Will update the list element pointed to by the handle with the new target value
-and recompute the new aggregated target, calling the notification trees if the
-target is changed.
+ Will update the list element pointed to by the handle with the new target
+ value and recompute the new aggregated target, calling the notification
+ trees if the target is changed.
int dev_pm_qos_remove_request(handle):
-Will remove the element. After removal it will update the aggregate target and
-call the notification trees if the target was changed as a result of removing
-the request.
+ Will remove the element. After removal it will update the aggregate target
+ and call the notification trees if the target was changed as a result of
+ removing the request.
- s32 dev_pm_qos_read_value(device):
+ s32 dev_pm_qos_read_value(device, type):
-Returns the aggregated value for a given device's constraints list.
+ Returns the aggregated value for a given device's constraints list.
enum pm_qos_flags_status dev_pm_qos_flags(device, mask)
-Check PM QoS flags of the given device against the given mask of flags.
-The meaning of the return values is as follows:
- PM_QOS_FLAGS_ALL: All flags from the mask are set
- PM_QOS_FLAGS_SOME: Some flags from the mask are set
- PM_QOS_FLAGS_NONE: No flags from the mask are set
- PM_QOS_FLAGS_UNDEFINED: The device's PM QoS structure has not been
- initialized or the list of requests is empty.
+ Check PM QoS flags of the given device against the given mask of flags.
+ The meaning of the return values is as follows:
+
+ PM_QOS_FLAGS_ALL:
+ All flags from the mask are set
+ PM_QOS_FLAGS_SOME:
+ Some flags from the mask are set
+ PM_QOS_FLAGS_NONE:
+ No flags from the mask are set
+ PM_QOS_FLAGS_UNDEFINED:
+ The device's PM QoS structure has not been initialized
+ or the list of requests is empty.
int dev_pm_qos_add_ancestor_request(dev, handle, type, value)
-Add a PM QoS request for the first direct ancestor of the given device whose
-power.ignore_children flag is unset (for DEV_PM_QOS_RESUME_LATENCY requests)
-or whose power.set_latency_tolerance callback pointer is not NULL (for
-DEV_PM_QOS_LATENCY_TOLERANCE requests).
+ Add a PM QoS request for the first direct ancestor of the given device whose
+ power.ignore_children flag is unset (for DEV_PM_QOS_RESUME_LATENCY requests)
+ or whose power.set_latency_tolerance callback pointer is not NULL (for
+ DEV_PM_QOS_LATENCY_TOLERANCE requests).
int dev_pm_qos_expose_latency_limit(device, value)
-Add a request to the device's PM QoS list of resume latency constraints and
-create a sysfs attribute pm_qos_resume_latency_us under the device's power
-directory allowing user space to manipulate that request.
+ Add a request to the device's PM QoS list of resume latency constraints and
+ create a sysfs attribute pm_qos_resume_latency_us under the device's power
+ directory allowing user space to manipulate that request.
void dev_pm_qos_hide_latency_limit(device)
-Drop the request added by dev_pm_qos_expose_latency_limit() from the device's
-PM QoS list of resume latency constraints and remove sysfs attribute
-pm_qos_resume_latency_us from the device's power directory.
+ Drop the request added by dev_pm_qos_expose_latency_limit() from the device's
+ PM QoS list of resume latency constraints and remove sysfs attribute
+ pm_qos_resume_latency_us from the device's power directory.
int dev_pm_qos_expose_flags(device, value)
-Add a request to the device's PM QoS list of flags and create sysfs attribute
-pm_qos_no_power_off under the device's power directory allowing user space to
-change the value of the PM_QOS_FLAG_NO_POWER_OFF flag.
+ Add a request to the device's PM QoS list of flags and create sysfs attribute
+ pm_qos_no_power_off under the device's power directory allowing user space to
+ change the value of the PM_QOS_FLAG_NO_POWER_OFF flag.
void dev_pm_qos_hide_flags(device)
-Drop the request added by dev_pm_qos_expose_flags() from the device's PM QoS list
-of flags and remove sysfs attribute pm_qos_no_power_off from the device's power
-directory.
+ Drop the request added by dev_pm_qos_expose_flags() from the device's PM QoS list
+ of flags and remove sysfs attribute pm_qos_no_power_off from the device's power
+ directory.
Notification mechanisms:
+
The per-device PM QoS framework has a per-device notification tree.
- int dev_pm_qos_add_notifier(device, notifier):
- Adds a notification callback function for the device.
+ int dev_pm_qos_add_notifier(device, notifier, type):
-Adds a notification callback function for the device for a particular request
-type.
++ Adds a notification callback function for the device for a particular request
++ type.
+
-The callback is called when the aggregated value of the device constraints list
-is changed.
+ The callback is called when the aggregated value of the device constraints list
- is changed (for resume latency device PM QoS only).
++ is changed.
- int dev_pm_qos_remove_notifier(device, notifier):
+ int dev_pm_qos_remove_notifier(device, notifier, type):
-Removes the notification callback function for the device.
+ Removes the notification callback function for the device.
Active state latency tolerance
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
@ 2019-11-24 23:13 Stephen Rothwell
2019-11-25 14:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-11-27 23:58 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 2 replies; 27+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2019-11-24 23:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki, Bjorn Helgaas
Cc: Linux Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2594 bytes --]
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
Documentation/power/pci.rst
between commits:
b64cf7a1711d ("PCI/PM: Wrap long lines in documentation")
89cdbc354635 ("PCI/PM: Remove unused pci_driver.resume_early() hook")
1a1daf097e21 ("PCI/PM: Remove unused pci_driver.suspend_late() hook")
from the pci tree and commit:
1992b66d2f55 ("PM: Wrap documentation to fit in 80 columns")
from the pm tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc Documentation/power/pci.rst
index 0924d29636ad,51e0a493d284..000000000000
--- a/Documentation/power/pci.rst
+++ b/Documentation/power/pci.rst
@@@ -692,11 -692,11 +692,11 @@@ controlling the runtime power managemen
At the time of this writing there are two ways to define power management
callbacks for a PCI device driver, the recommended one, based on using a
dev_pm_ops structure described in Documentation/driver-api/pm/devices.rst, and
- the "legacy" one, in which the .suspend() and .resume() callbacks from struct
- pci_driver are used. The legacy approach, however, doesn't allow one to define
- runtime power management callbacks and is not really suitable for any new
- drivers. Therefore it is not covered by this document (refer to the source code
- to learn more about it).
-the "legacy" one, in which the .suspend(), .suspend_late(), .resume_early(), and
-.resume() callbacks from struct pci_driver are used. The legacy approach,
-however, doesn't allow one to define runtime power management callbacks and is
-not really suitable for any new drivers. Therefore it is not covered by this
-document (refer to the source code to learn more about it).
++the "legacy" one, in which the .suspend() and .resume() callbacks from
++struct pci_driver are used. The legacy approach, however, doesn't allow
++one to define runtime power management callbacks and is not really suitable
++for any new drivers. Therefore it is not covered by this document (refer
++to the source code to learn more about it).
It is recommended that all PCI device drivers define a struct dev_pm_ops object
containing pointers to power management (PM) callbacks that will be executed by
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
2019-11-24 23:13 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2019-11-25 14:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-11-27 23:58 ` Stephen Rothwell
1 sibling, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2019-11-25 14:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Rothwell
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas, Linux Next Mailing List, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Monday, November 25, 2019 12:13:45 AM CET Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
>
> Documentation/power/pci.rst
>
> between commits:
>
> b64cf7a1711d ("PCI/PM: Wrap long lines in documentation")
> 89cdbc354635 ("PCI/PM: Remove unused pci_driver.resume_early() hook")
> 1a1daf097e21 ("PCI/PM: Remove unused pci_driver.suspend_late() hook")
>
> from the pci tree and commit:
>
> 1992b66d2f55 ("PM: Wrap documentation to fit in 80 columns")
>
> from the pm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
Thanks, the fix looks good to me.
Cheers,
Rafael
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree
2019-11-24 23:13 Stephen Rothwell
2019-11-25 14:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2019-11-27 23:58 ` Stephen Rothwell
1 sibling, 0 replies; 27+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2019-11-27 23:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bjorn Helgaas
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki, Linux Next Mailing List,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linus
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2884 bytes --]
Hi all,
On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 10:13:45 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the pm tree got a conflict in:
>
> Documentation/power/pci.rst
>
> between commits:
>
> b64cf7a1711d ("PCI/PM: Wrap long lines in documentation")
> 89cdbc354635 ("PCI/PM: Remove unused pci_driver.resume_early() hook")
> 1a1daf097e21 ("PCI/PM: Remove unused pci_driver.suspend_late() hook")
>
> from the pci tree and commit:
>
> 1992b66d2f55 ("PM: Wrap documentation to fit in 80 columns")
>
> from the pm tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>
> diff --cc Documentation/power/pci.rst
> index 0924d29636ad,51e0a493d284..000000000000
> --- a/Documentation/power/pci.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/power/pci.rst
> @@@ -692,11 -692,11 +692,11 @@@ controlling the runtime power managemen
> At the time of this writing there are two ways to define power management
> callbacks for a PCI device driver, the recommended one, based on using a
> dev_pm_ops structure described in Documentation/driver-api/pm/devices.rst, and
> - the "legacy" one, in which the .suspend() and .resume() callbacks from struct
> - pci_driver are used. The legacy approach, however, doesn't allow one to define
> - runtime power management callbacks and is not really suitable for any new
> - drivers. Therefore it is not covered by this document (refer to the source code
> - to learn more about it).
> -the "legacy" one, in which the .suspend(), .suspend_late(), .resume_early(), and
> -.resume() callbacks from struct pci_driver are used. The legacy approach,
> -however, doesn't allow one to define runtime power management callbacks and is
> -not really suitable for any new drivers. Therefore it is not covered by this
> -document (refer to the source code to learn more about it).
> ++the "legacy" one, in which the .suspend() and .resume() callbacks from
> ++struct pci_driver are used. The legacy approach, however, doesn't allow
> ++one to define runtime power management callbacks and is not really suitable
> ++for any new drivers. Therefore it is not covered by this document (refer
> ++to the source code to learn more about it).
>
> It is recommended that all PCI device drivers define a struct dev_pm_ops object
> containing pointers to power management (PM) callbacks that will be executed by
This is now a conflict between the pci tree and Linus' tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 27+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-11-27 23:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-11-06 2:48 linux-next: manual merge of the pm tree with the pci tree Stephen Rothwell
2012-11-06 16:52 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2012-11-16 10:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-01-10 0:28 Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-10 13:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-01-10 18:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-01-30 8:35 Stephen Rothwell
2013-01-30 12:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-02-15 1:23 Stephen Rothwell
2013-02-15 12:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-02-18 1:11 Stephen Rothwell
2013-02-18 12:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-02-18 1:17 Stephen Rothwell
2013-02-18 12:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-02-20 1:55 Stephen Rothwell
2013-02-20 12:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-04-16 2:46 Stephen Rothwell
2013-04-16 17:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-06-27 3:02 Stephen Rothwell
2015-02-11 1:07 Stephen Rothwell
2015-02-11 1:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-11 2:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-11 2:05 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-07-01 3:24 Stephen Rothwell
2019-11-24 23:13 Stephen Rothwell
2019-11-25 14:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-11-27 23:58 ` Stephen Rothwell
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).