linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
To: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>,
	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 V7 08/11] ACPI: always register memory hotplug scan handler even if CONFIG_X86_INTEL_LPSS is cleared
Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 13:53:39 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4177604.8JWRhYqtaS@vostro.rjw.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140526105636.GC1765@lahna.fi.intel.com>

On Monday, May 26, 2014 01:56:36 PM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 02:02:30AM +0800, Zhang Rui wrote:
> > The new ACPI device enumeration mechanism, which will be introduced
> > in a later patch, will enumerate the _HID devices w/o any scan
> > handler attached to platform bus.
> > This means that, for the devices that are attached to a configurable
> > scan handler, we should make sure no platform devices would be
> > created for them even if the scan handler is compiled out.
> > 
> > Fix this problem for lpss devices by always register the lpss scan handler,
> > but with meaningful callbacks only when CONFIG_X86_INTEL_LPSS is set.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/acpi/Makefile    |  2 +-
> >  drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c | 63 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
> >  drivers/acpi/internal.h  |  4 ---
> >  3 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Makefile b/drivers/acpi/Makefile
> > index 171efc2..605eff7 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/Makefile
> > @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ acpi-y				+= processor_core.o
> >  acpi-y				+= ec.o
> >  acpi-$(CONFIG_ACPI_DOCK)	+= dock.o
> >  acpi-y				+= pci_root.o pci_link.o pci_irq.o
> > -acpi-$(CONFIG_X86_INTEL_LPSS)	+= acpi_lpss.o
> > +acpi-y				+= acpi_lpss.o
> >  acpi-y				+= acpi_platform.o
> >  acpi-y				+= acpi_pnp.o
> >  acpi-y				+= power.o
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c
> > index 69e29f4..bb5b3f2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c
> > @@ -24,6 +24,8 @@
> >  
> >  ACPI_MODULE_NAME("acpi_lpss");
> >  
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_INTEL_LPSS
> > +
> >  #define LPSS_CLK_SIZE	0x04
> >  #define LPSS_LTR_SIZE	0x18
> >  
> > @@ -159,40 +161,50 @@ static struct lpss_device_desc byt_i2c_dev_desc = {
> >  	.shared_clock = &i2c_clock,
> >  };
> >  
> > +#define LPSS_PTR(desc) ((unsigned long)&desc)
> > +
> > +#else
> > +
> > +#define LPSS_PTR(desc) 0
> > +
> > +#endif
> > +
> >  static const struct acpi_device_id acpi_lpss_device_ids[] = {
> >  	/* Generic LPSS devices */
> > -	{ "INTL9C60", (unsigned long)&lpss_dma_desc },
> > +	{ "INTL9C60", LPSS_PTR(lpss_dma_desc) },
> >  
> >  	/* Lynxpoint LPSS devices */
> > -	{ "INT33C0", (unsigned long)&lpt_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "INT33C1", (unsigned long)&lpt_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "INT33C2", (unsigned long)&lpt_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "INT33C3", (unsigned long)&lpt_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "INT33C4", (unsigned long)&lpt_uart_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "INT33C5", (unsigned long)&lpt_uart_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "INT33C6", (unsigned long)&lpt_sdio_dev_desc },
> > +	{ "INT33C0", LPSS_PTR(lpt_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "INT33C1", LPSS_PTR(lpt_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "INT33C2", LPSS_PTR(lpt_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "INT33C3", LPSS_PTR(lpt_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "INT33C4", LPSS_PTR(lpt_uart_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "INT33C5", LPSS_PTR(lpt_uart_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "INT33C6", LPSS_PTR(lpt_sdio_dev_desc) },
> >  	{ "INT33C7", },
> >  
> >  	/* BayTrail LPSS devices */
> > -	{ "80860F09", (unsigned long)&byt_pwm_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "80860F0A", (unsigned long)&byt_uart_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "80860F0E", (unsigned long)&byt_spi_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "80860F14", (unsigned long)&byt_sdio_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "80860F41", (unsigned long)&byt_i2c_dev_desc },
> > +	{ "80860F09", LPSS_PTR(byt_pwm_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "80860F0A", LPSS_PTR(byt_uart_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "80860F0E", LPSS_PTR(byt_spi_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "80860F14", LPSS_PTR(byt_sdio_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "80860F41", LPSS_PTR(byt_i2c_dev_desc) },
> >  	{ "INT33B2", },
> >  
> > -	{ "INT3430", (unsigned long)&lpt_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "INT3431", (unsigned long)&lpt_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "INT3432", (unsigned long)&lpt_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "INT3433", (unsigned long)&lpt_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "INT3434", (unsigned long)&lpt_uart_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "INT3435", (unsigned long)&lpt_uart_dev_desc },
> > -	{ "INT3436", (unsigned long)&lpt_sdio_dev_desc },
> > +	{ "INT3430", LPSS_PTR(lpt_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "INT3431", LPSS_PTR(lpt_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "INT3432", LPSS_PTR(lpt_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "INT3433", LPSS_PTR(lpt_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "INT3434", LPSS_PTR(lpt_uart_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "INT3435", LPSS_PTR(lpt_uart_dev_desc) },
> > +	{ "INT3436", LPSS_PTR(lpt_sdio_dev_desc) },
> >  	{ "INT3437", },
> >  
> >  	{ }
> >  };
> >  
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_INTEL_LPSS
> > +
> >  static int is_memory(struct acpi_resource *res, void *not_used)
> >  {
> >  	struct resource r;
> > @@ -503,18 +515,23 @@ static void acpi_lpss_unbind(struct device *dev)
> >  {
> >  	dev->power.set_latency_tolerance = NULL;
> >  }
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_X86_INTEL_LPSS */
> >  
> >  static struct acpi_scan_handler lpss_handler = {
> >  	.ids = acpi_lpss_device_ids,
> > -	.attach = acpi_lpss_create_device,
> > -	.bind = acpi_lpss_bind,
> > -	.unbind = acpi_lpss_unbind,
> >  };
> >  
> >  void __init acpi_lpss_init(void)
> >  {
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_INTEL_LPSS
> >  	if (!lpt_clk_init()) {
> >  		bus_register_notifier(&platform_bus_type, &acpi_lpss_nb);
> > +		lpss_handler.attach = acpi_lpss_create_device;
> > +		lpss_handler.bind = acpi_lpss_bind;
> > +		lpss_handler.unbind = acpi_lpss_unbind;
> >  		acpi_scan_add_handler(&lpss_handler);
> > +		return;
> >  	}
> > +#endif
> > +	acpi_scan_add_handler(&lpss_handler);
> 
> I'm wondering whether it is worth the ugliness to get platform bus
> enumeration the default?
> 
> Since you already have the PNP whitelist, can't we just use that for PNP
> and keep these files as they are? In other words, don't make any kind of
> physical device by default and let the scan handlers to decide.

Well, that's tempting, but then we'd get one more whitelist pretty much without
any benefit, because we'd be still going to have the list in acpi_platform.c.

The purpose of the whole exercise is not to prevent PNP devices from being
created by default (which admittedly is a nice side effect), but to get rid
of the white list in acpi_platform.c - and in particular, to avoid the
necessity to add every ACPI-enumerated platform device to that list in the
future.

Rafael


  reply	other threads:[~2014-05-26 11:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-05-22 18:02 [PATCH V7 00/11] ACPI: ACPI enumeration rework Zhang Rui
2014-05-22 18:02 ` [PATCH V7 01/11] ACPI: introduce .match() callback for ACPI scan handler Zhang Rui
2014-05-22 18:02 ` [PATCH V7 02/11] PNPACPI: use whilte list for pnpacpi device enumeration Zhang Rui
2014-05-22 18:14   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2014-05-23  0:00     ` Zhang Rui
2014-05-22 18:02 ` [PATCH V7 03/11] ACPI: remove ids that does not comply with the ACPI PNP id rule Zhang Rui
2014-05-22 18:02 ` [PATCH V7 04/11] ACPI: remove unsupported serial PNP ids from acpi pnp scan handler id lsit Zhang Rui
2014-05-22 18:02 ` [PATCH V7 05/11] ACPI: allow scan handlers without .attach() callback Zhang Rui
2014-05-22 18:02 ` [PATCH V7 06/11] ACPI: always register container scan handler even if CONFIG_ACPI_CONTAINER is cleared Zhang Rui
2014-05-22 18:02 ` [PATCH V7 07/11] ACPI: always register memory hotplug scan handler even if CONFIG_ACPI_HOTPLUG_MEMORY " Zhang Rui
2014-05-22 18:02 ` [PATCH V7 08/11] ACPI: always register memory hotplug scan handler even if CONFIG_X86_INTEL_LPSS " Zhang Rui
2014-05-26 10:56   ` Mika Westerberg
2014-05-26 11:53     ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2014-05-26 11:52       ` Mika Westerberg
2014-05-26 12:40         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-26 12:58           ` Mika Westerberg
2014-05-22 18:02 ` [PATCH V7 09/11] ACPI: introduce platform_id flag Zhang Rui
2014-05-22 18:02 ` [PATCH V7 10/11] ACPI: use platform bus as the default bus for _HID enumeration Zhang Rui
2014-05-26 10:21   ` Mika Westerberg
2014-05-28  7:16     ` Zhang Rui
2014-05-22 18:02 ` [PATCH V7 11/11] ACPI: introduce acpi platform exclude id list Zhang Rui
2014-05-30  2:20 ` [PATCH 0/10] ACPI enumeration rework (was: Re: [PATCH V7 00/11] ACPI: ACPI enumeration rework) Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-30  2:21   ` [PATCH 1/10] ACPI / scan: .match() callback for ACPI scan handlers Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-30  2:23   ` [PATCH 2/10] ACPI / PNP: use device ID list for PNPACPI device enumeration Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-30  2:24   ` [PATCH 3/10] ACPI / scan: drop IDs that do not comply with the ACPI PNP ID rule Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-30  2:25   ` [PATCH 4/10] ACPI / scan: drop unsupported serial IDs from PNP ACPI scan handler ID list Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-30  2:26   ` [PATCH 5/10] ACPI / scan: introduce platform_id device PNP type flag Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-30  2:27   ` [PATCH 6/10] ACPI / scan: Change the meaning of missing .attach() in scan handlers Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-30  2:28   ` [PATCH 7/10] ACPI / scan: always register container scan handler Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-30  2:29   ` [PATCH 8/10] ACPI / scan: always register memory hotplug " Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-30  2:30   ` [PATCH 9/10] ACPI / scan: always register ACPI LPSS " Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-30 12:34     ` [Update][PATCH " Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-30  2:30   ` [PATCH 10/10] ACPI / scan: use platform bus type by default for _HID enumeration Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-30 12:35     ` [Update][PATCH " Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-31  5:56       ` Zhang Rui
2014-05-31  6:29         ` Zhang Rui
2014-05-30  8:33   ` [PATCH 0/10] ACPI enumeration rework (was: Re: [PATCH V7 00/11] ACPI: ACPI enumeration rework) Mika Westerberg
2014-05-30 12:17     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-05-31 14:46   ` Zhang Rui
2014-05-31 22:29     ` Rafael J. Wysocki

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=4177604.8JWRhYqtaS@vostro.rjw.lan \
    --to=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matthew.garrett@nebula.com \
    --cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
    --cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH V7 08/11] ACPI: always register memory hotplug scan handler even if CONFIG_X86_INTEL_LPSS is cleared' \
    /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

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).