Re: [Update][PATCH 10/10] ACPI / scan: use platform bus type by default for _HID enumeration

[Zhang Rui]

On Sat, 2014-05-31 at 13:56 +0800, Zhang Rui wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-05-30 at 14:35 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > From: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Because of the growing demand for enumerating ACPI devices to
> > platform bus, change the code to enumerate ACPI device objects to
> > platform bus by default.  Namely, create platform devices for the
> > ACPI device objects that
> >  1. Have pnp.type.platform_id set (device objects with _HID currently).
> >  2. Do not have a scan handler attached.
> >  3. Are not SPI/I2C slave devices (that should be enumerated to the
> >     appropriate buses bus by their parent).
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
> > [rjw: Subject and changelog, rebase and code cleanup]
> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > 
> > Changelog rework and minor cleanups.
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > 
> > ---
> >  drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c |   40 ++++++++--------------------------------
> >  drivers/acpi/scan.c          |   42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  2 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
> > +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
> > @@ -22,21 +22,11 @@
> >  
> >  ACPI_MODULE_NAME("platform");
> >  
> > -/*
> > - * The following ACPI IDs are known to be suitable for representing as
> > - * platform devices.
> > - */
> > -static const struct acpi_device_id acpi_platform_device_ids[] = {
> > -
> > -	{ "PNP0D40" },
> > -	{ "VPC2004" },
> > -	{ "BCM4752" },
> > -
> > -	/* Intel Smart Sound Technology */
> > -	{ "INT33C8" },
> > -	{ "80860F28" },
> > -
> > -	{ }
> > +static const struct acpi_device_id forbidden_id_list[] = {
> > +	{"PNP0000", 0},	/* PIC */
> > +	{"PNP0100", 0},	/* Timer */
> > +	{"PNP0200", 0},	/* AT DMA Controller */
> > +	{"", 0},
> >  };
> >  
> >  /**
> > @@ -63,6 +53,9 @@ struct platform_device *acpi_create_plat
> >  	if (adev->physical_node_count)
> >  		return NULL;
> >  
> > +	if (!acpi_match_device_ids(adev, forbidden_id_list))
> > +		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > +
> >  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&resource_list);
> >  	count = acpi_dev_get_resources(adev, &resource_list, NULL, NULL);
> >  	if (count < 0) {
> > @@ -120,20 +113,3 @@ struct platform_device *acpi_create_plat
> >  	kfree(resources);
> >  	return pdev;
> >  }
> > -
> > -static int acpi_platform_attach(struct acpi_device *adev,
> > -				const struct acpi_device_id *id)
> > -{
> > -	acpi_create_platform_device(adev);
> > -	return 1;
> > -}
> > -
> this patch does not apply.
> we do not have the above code in drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c.

I see. this patch is made based on the drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
changes in your linux-next branch. Sorry for the noise.

thanks,
rui
> 
> thanks,
> rui
> > -static struct acpi_scan_handler platform_handler = {
> > -	.ids = acpi_platform_device_ids,
> > -	.attach = acpi_platform_attach,
> > -};
> > -
> > -void __init acpi_platform_init(void)
> > -{
> > -	acpi_scan_add_handler(&platform_handler);
> > -}
> > Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> > +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> > @@ -2070,6 +2070,44 @@ static acpi_status acpi_bus_check_add(ac
> >  	return AE_OK;
> >  }
> >  
> > +static int acpi_check_spi_i2c_slave(struct acpi_resource *ares, void *data)
> > +{
> > +	bool *is_spi_i2c_slave_p = data;
> > +
> > +	if (ares->type != ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_SERIAL_BUS)
> > +		return 1;
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * devices that are connected to UART still need to be enumerated to
> > +	 * platform bus
> > +	 */
> > +	if (ares->data.common_serial_bus.type != ACPI_RESOURCE_SERIAL_TYPE_UART)
> > +		*is_spi_i2c_slave_p = true;
> > +
> > +	 /* no need to do more checking */
> > +	return -1;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void acpi_default_enumeration(struct acpi_device *device)
> > +{
> > +	struct list_head resource_list;
> > +	bool is_spi_i2c_slave = false;
> > +
> > +	if (!device->pnp.type.platform_id || device->handler)
> > +		return;
> > +
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Do not enemerate SPI/I2C slaves as they will be enuerated by their
> > +	 * respective parents.
> > +	 */
> > +	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&resource_list);
> > +	acpi_dev_get_resources(device, &resource_list, acpi_check_spi_i2c_slave,
> > +			       &is_spi_i2c_slave);
> > +	acpi_dev_free_resource_list(&resource_list);
> > +	if (!is_spi_i2c_slave)
> > +		acpi_create_platform_device(device);
> > +}
> > +
> >  static int acpi_scan_attach_handler(struct acpi_device *device)
> >  {
> >  	struct acpi_hardware_id *hwid;
> > @@ -2095,6 +2133,9 @@ static int acpi_scan_attach_handler(stru
> >  				break;
> >  		}
> >  	}
> > +	if (!ret)
> > +		acpi_default_enumeration(device);
> > +
> >  	return ret;
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -2254,7 +2295,6 @@ int __init acpi_scan_init(void)
> >  	acpi_pci_root_init();
> >  	acpi_pci_link_init();
> >  	acpi_processor_init();
> > -	acpi_platform_init();
> >  	acpi_lpss_init();
> >  	acpi_cmos_rtc_init();
> >  	acpi_container_init();
> > 
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/