From: joeyli <jlee@suse.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: "Lee, Chun-Yi" <joeyli.kernel@gmail.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: check the online state of all children in container
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 11:01:18 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170322030118.GD20835@linux-l9pv.suse> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4105478.B7tRAuaXDe@aspire.rjw.lan>
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 01:58:30AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 22, 2017 09:01:48 AM Lee, Chun-Yi wrote:
> > Just checking the state of container is not enough to confirm that
> > the whole container is offlined.
>
> And why is that so?
>
Actually there does not have real kernel issue triggered by this code now.
I reviewed code and found the difference between acpi_container_offline().
Considering a container that it includes devices and sub-containers
like this:
Scope (_SB)
Device (MODU)
Name (_HID, "ACPI0004") <=== main-container
Device (PCIE)
Name (_HID, EisaId ("PNP0A08"))
Device (SUBM)
Name (_HID, "ACPI0004") <=== sub-container
Device (MEM0)
Name (_HID, EisaId ("PNP0C80"))
...
The original code checks the physical nodes on the main container but
doesn't check children's physical nodes. So, it may happen the sub-container
didn't offline but the offline checking of main container is pass.
Please kindly direct me if I misunderstood or missed any detail in the codes
about physcial node and container offline.
Thank a lot!
Joey Lee
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-22 3:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-22 1:01 [PATCH] acpi: check the online state of all children in container Lee, Chun-Yi
2017-03-22 0:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-03-22 3:01 ` joeyli [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170322030118.GD20835@linux-l9pv.suse \
--to=jlee@suse.com \
--cc=jkosina@suse.cz \
--cc=joeyli.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).