From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161130Ab2KWKUn (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Nov 2012 05:20:43 -0500 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:53630 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161082Ab2KWKUl (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Nov 2012 05:20:41 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.83,306,1352102400"; d="scan'208";a="251420599" Message-ID: <50AF4E8F.1030406@intel.com> Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 12:23:11 +0200 From: Adrian Hunter Organization: Intel Finland Oy, Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki, Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4, Domiciled in Helsinki User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121016 Thunderbird/16.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" CC: Chris Ball , linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add SDHCI ACPI driver References: <1353573830-13006-1-git-send-email-adrian.hunter@intel.com> <87k3tdagim.fsf@octavius.laptop.org> <50AE3AB2.2070307@intel.com> <3578053.jWYihc5IJI@vostro.rjw.lan> In-Reply-To: <3578053.jWYihc5IJI@vostro.rjw.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 22/11/12 23:24, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, November 22, 2012 04:46:10 PM Adrian Hunter wrote: >> On 22/11/12 15:55, Chris Ball wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 22 2012, Adrian Hunter wrote: >>>> Here is SDHCI ACPI driver. It is dependent on new ACPI Platform support >>>> so I suggest Rafael takes the patches with Chris' Ack. >>>> >>>> Please note that I would prefer this to be queued for 3.8 >>> >>> Looks fine: >>> >>> Acked-by: Chris Ball >> >> Thank you! >> >>> >>> I have some dumb questions, though -- what kind of platforms ship with >>> these devices? Do they ever have the controller on PCI too, and what >>> happens with sdhci-pci vs. sdhci-acpi in that case? >> >> Since the arrival of ACPI5, platform devices can be configured using ACPI >> tables. PCI can also be used, but the firmware ensures that the same >> device is not enumerated via both ACPI and PCI. >> >> Rafael can you take these patches? > > Well, I'd prefer pnpacpi/core.c to actually use acpi_platform_device_ids[] > directly in addition to excluded_id_list[], so that duplicate entries don't > have to be added to the both of them. > > Also, I wonder if you really don't want to use ACPI PM and if you don't, > then why? Mika and Lv Zheng are working on adding it to acpi_platform