On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> The IDs of ACPI device nodes stored in their pnp.ids member arrays
> are sorted by decreasing priority (i.e. the highest-priority ID is
> the first entry). This means that when matching scan handlers to
> device nodes, the namespace scanning code should walk the list of
> scan handlers for each device node ID instead of walking the list
> of device node IDs for each handler (the latter causes the first
> handler matching any of the device node IDs to be chosen, although
> there may be another handler matching an ID of a higher priority
> which should be preferred). Make the code follow this observation.
>
> This change has been suggested and justified by Toshi Kani.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/scan.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> Index: test/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> ===================================================================
> --- test.orig/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> +++ test/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> @@ -1556,26 +1556,42 @@ static acpi_status acpi_bus_check_add(ac
> return AE_OK;
> }
>
> -static int acpi_scan_attach_handler(struct acpi_device *device)
> +static int acpi_scan_do_attach_handler(struct acpi_device *device, char *id)
> {
> struct acpi_scan_handler *handler;
> - int ret = 0;
>
> list_for_each_entry(handler, &acpi_scan_handlers_list, list_node) {
> - const struct acpi_device_id *id;
> + const struct acpi_device_id *devid;
>
> - id = __acpi_match_device(device, handler->ids);
> - if (!id)
> - continue;
> -
> - ret = handler->attach(device, id);
> - if (ret > 0) {
> - device->handler = handler;
> - break;
> - } else if (ret < 0) {
> - break;
> + for (devid = handler->ids; devid->id[0]; devid++) {
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (strcmp((char *)devid->id, id))
> + continue;
> +
> + ret = handler->attach(device, devid);
> + if (ret > 0) {
> + device->handler = handler;
> + return ret;
> + } else if (ret < 0) {
> + return ret;
> + }
> }
> }
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int acpi_scan_attach_handler(struct acpi_device *device)
> +{
> + struct acpi_hardware_id *hwid;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(hwid, &device->pnp.ids, list) {
> + ret = acpi_scan_do_attach_handler(device, hwid->id);
> + if (ret)
> + break;
> +
> + }
> return ret;
> }
>
>
Looks like right to honor the order in pnp.ids.
so there is same problem with acpi_bus_match/acpi_match_device_ids
that need to fixed?
Yinghai
--
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
