From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752036AbaEULFJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 May 2014 07:05:09 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:62934 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751018AbaEULFG (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 May 2014 07:05:06 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.98,879,1392192000"; d="scan'208";a="515365831" Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 14:04:44 +0300 From: Mika Westerberg To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Zhang Rui , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com, matthew.garrett@nebula.com, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 09/11] ACPI: introduce flag .is_master_device Message-ID: <20140521110444.GU1651@lahna.fi.intel.com> References: <1400136256-2218-1-git-send-email-rui.zhang@intel.com> <1400136256-2218-10-git-send-email-rui.zhang@intel.com> <20140521085207.GR1651@lahna.fi.intel.com> <2394524.GkgpdWbBbP@vostro.rjw.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2394524.GkgpdWbBbP@vostro.rjw.lan> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 01:10:33PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Wednesday, May 21, 2014 11:52:07 AM Mika Westerberg wrote: > > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 02:44:14PM +0800, Zhang Rui wrote: > > > For some ACPI device objects, they represent master devices, > > > and their children devices are enumerated by bus controller drivers > > > for the buses they are on. > > > > > > In this case, we do not want to enumerate their children devices to > > > platform bus explicitly in acpi scan code. > > > > > > Thus a new flag .is_master_device is introduced in this patch. > > > > > > For devices with this flag set, we will not do default enumeration > > > for their children. > > > > Is there any particular reason we would like to enumerate everything > > below the first device by default? > > Yes, there is. Device objects without _ADR under the PCI host bridge. OK. > Or we can skip the children under every *platform* device created by this by > default and mark the ones where we want the children to be enumerated as > platform devices too in a special way if needed. > > I guess we could try that (that was the Rui's original idea IIRC). That sounds better to me. I wonder if we can do this analogous to of_platform_bus_probe() and friends?