On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Saturday, January 19, 2013 12:07:42 AM Jiang Liu wrote: >>>> As discussed in thread at https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1946851/, >>>> there's no value in supporting CONFIG_ACPI_PCI_SLOT=m any more. >>>> So change Kconfig and code to only support building pci_slot as >>>> built-in driver. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> Acked-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> I think we should eventually get rid of acpi_pci_register_driver() and >> do this initialization directly from acpi_pci_root_add(). But >> removing the module option here is a good first step. >> >> Rafael, do you want to apply this (and [6/8]) via your tree? If not, >> I can take it. > > If bios have messed up slot name or idx, we will get strange 1-1.... > other crazy name. > > if you really need to put it as built-in, may need to some command > line that user could switch it off. It would save us all a lot of time if you gave an example and worked through the scenario where this is a problem. We already have the choice of having pci_slot built-in, so if there's a bug in that config, we already have the bug. This patch merely removes a config where the bug might be covered up. I don't know why "adding a command line switch" appeals to you as the solution to every problem. As far as I'm concerned that's not a solution to ANY problem. It might be a band-aid to enable users to limp along while we figure out a correct solution, but it's certainly not a resolution. 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
