On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Sure, the 'echo "\_SB.PCIB 3" > /proc/acpi/sci/notify' way looks more >> like physical hotadd/remove because it is basically injecting the >> notify event that the hardware/BIOS should be generating itself. But >> it is platform-specific and therefore unacceptable as a general user >> interface. >> >> Using /sys/devices/LNXSYSTM:00/device:00/PNP0A08:00/remove would be a >> more generic way. The PNP0A08:00/remove implementation would >> basically turn into an acpi_pci_root_remove() call, just like the >> 'echo "\_SB.PCIB 3" > /proc/acpi/sci/notify' does. > > if the users can not find _SB.PCIB etc, they may not find > LNXSYSTM:00/device:00/PNP0A08:00. > > so /sys/class/pci_bus/0000:80/remove is more easy for them? I don't think so. LNXSYSTM:00/... is the canonical machine description on x86. I think there should probably be a link from the PCI device to the upstream bridge. The upstream bridge could be either a P2P bridge or a host bridge. Bjorn -- 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
