linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jarod Wilson <jarod@redhat.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pci/hotplug: work-around for missing _RMV on HP ZBook G2
Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 10:33:08 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5559F824.1020703@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1481007.OlNlbgiUPd@vostro.rjw.lan>

On 5/17/2015 8:26 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, May 16, 2015 09:41:55 AM Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 09:37:50AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>> Hi Jarod,
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 03:33:58PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
>>>> The HP ZBook 15 and 17 Mobile Workstations, generation 2, up to and
>>>> including at least BIOS revision 01.07, do not have an ACPI _RMV object
>>>> associated with their expresscard slots, so acpi-based hotplug-capable
>>>> slot detection fails. If we fall back to pcie-based detection, the systems
>>>> work just fine, so this uses dmi matching to do that. With luck, a future
>>>> BIOS will remedy this (I've let someone at HP know about the problem),
>>>> but for now, just use this for all existing versions.
...
>>> Oh, my goodness.  I forgot how terrible this path is.  Can anyone write a
>>> simple explanation of how we choose to use acpiphp or pciehp?
>
> In theory, that should depend on the _OSC handshake in acpi_pci_root_add().
>
> If the firmware doesn't give us control of the PCIe features, we'll not use
> pciehp (or at least that's the idea).
>
> acpiphp is used if pciehp doesn't claim the device, AFAICS.

[    4.013326] acpi PNP0A08:00: _OSC: OS supports [ExtendedConfig ASPM 
ClockPM Segments MSI]
[    4.015860] acpi PNP0A08:00: _OSC: OS now controls [PCIeHotplug PME 
AER PCIeCapability]

So at a glance, it would appear that pciehp *should* be claiming it, 
right? Something I noted in the bug I filed is that the device ID 
reported there is PNP0A08, and the root_device_id table that associates 
with acpi_pci_root_add() only includes PNP0A03 in it. Is that correct, 
or should 08 also be in there, which might remedy this? (I can test this 
out easily enough).

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jarod@redhat.com

  reply	other threads:[~2015-05-18 14:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-14 19:33 [PATCH] pci/hotplug: work-around for missing _RMV on HP ZBook G2 Jarod Wilson
2015-05-16 14:37 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-05-16 14:41   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-05-18  0:26     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-05-18 14:33       ` Jarod Wilson [this message]
2015-05-18 16:17         ` Jarod Wilson
2015-05-18 20:45           ` Jarod Wilson
2015-05-18 23:06             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-05-19  3:06               ` Jarod Wilson
2015-05-19 11:36                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-05-19 11:43                   ` [PATCH] PCIe / hotplug: Drop pointless ACPI-based "slot detection" check Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-05-19 12:42                     ` Jarod Wilson
2015-05-19 13:29                       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-05-19 13:27                     ` [Update][PATCH] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-05-19 14:40                       ` Jarod Wilson
2015-05-21 16:11                       ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-05-22  1:21                         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-06-11 17:05                           ` Jarod Wilson
2015-06-11 20:38                             ` Jarod Wilson
2015-06-11 21:16                               ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-06-11 21:49                                 ` Jarod Wilson
2015-05-18 21:57         ` [PATCH] pci/hotplug: work-around for missing _RMV on HP ZBook G2 Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-05-18 14:30     ` Jarod Wilson

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=5559F824.1020703@redhat.com \
    --to=jarod@redhat.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --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).