On Friday, June 14, 2013 03:32:42 PM Tony Luck wrote: > On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > Can you please just test patch [5/5] alone without patches [1-4/5]? We believe > > that this should work too and if that's the case, we'll only need that patch > > and a reworked [1/5]. > > Your belief is sound - I popped all five patches and then applied just > 5/5 ... and > the system still works. Great, thanks! Can you please apply the appended patch on top of it and see if the system still works then? Rafael --- From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> Subject: ACPI / scan: Do not bind ACPI drivers to objects with scan handlers ACPI drivers must not be bound to device objects having scan handlers attatched to them, so make acpi_device_probe() fail with -EINVAL if the device object being probed has an ACPI scan handler. Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/acpi/scan.c | 3 +++ drivers/acpi/video.c | 3 --- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/scan.c =================================================================== --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/scan.c +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/scan.c @@ -939,6 +939,9 @@ static int acpi_device_probe(struct devi struct acpi_driver *acpi_drv = to_acpi_driver(dev->driver); int ret; + if (acpi_dev->handler) + return -EINVAL; + if (!acpi_drv->ops.add) return -ENOSYS; Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/video.c =================================================================== --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/video.c +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/video.c @@ -1722,9 +1722,6 @@ static int acpi_video_bus_add(struct acp int error; acpi_status status; - if (device->handler) - return -EINVAL; - status = acpi_walk_namespace(ACPI_TYPE_DEVICE, device->parent->handle, 1, acpi_video_bus_match, NULL, -- 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