On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 05:32:35PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > [Sorry for the duplicate; I meant to CC: linux-acpi, so I added it here.] > > Why do we have ACPI device drivers evaluating _INI? That seems > like something that should be done by Linux/ACPI, not by the driver. > > I see the following drivers using _INI: > drivers/hwmon/hp_accel.c > drivers/platform/x86/fujitsu-laptop.c > drivers/platform/x86/sony-laptop.c > > I looked at the git logs where the _INI usage was introduced in > these drivers, but none gives enough information for me to understand > why. > > If running _INI in the driver makes a difference, I think it's > really telling us about a problem in Linux/ACPI, and we should > fix that problem rather than sprinkling _INI evaluation around > in drivers. > > I do see _INI evaluation in this path: > > acpi_init > acpi_bus_init > acpi_initialize_objects(ACPI_FULL_INITIALIZATION) > acpi_ns_initialize_devices > acpi_ns_walk_namespace .. acpi_ns_init_one_device > > The spec (section 6.5.1) says OSPM should run _INI when a > description table is loaded. I assume the above path does > this for the DSDT, at least, but I'm not smart enough about > the ACPI CA to know whether we also handle SSDTs and dynamic > LoadTables correctly. well, it was long ago... I was going to say that when I added it it was because ospm wasn't calling _INI on the SNY6001 device but it doesn't seem to be the case... it was just my imagination I guess. I'll double check. Anyway, from a quick look, _STA on the SNY6001 is always returning 0x0F or 0x0D depending on the device being assigned an irq or not so ospm should be good. I think the _INI call can be removed for sony-laptop. cheers -- mattia :wq! -- 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
