On Monday, July 07, 2014 10:27:26 PM Zhang Rui wrote: > On Mon, 2014-07-07 at 14:53 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Wednesday, July 02, 2014 08:54:49 PM Zhang Rui wrote: > > > From 7daac7fc7cd7b605ccd84f10fc206cedf6170e89 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > > From: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 10:14:07 +0800 > > > Subject: [PATCH] PNPACPI: do ACPI binding directly > > > > > > PNPACPI uses acpi_bus_type to do ACPI binding for the PNPACPI devices. > > > > > > This is overkill because PNPACPI code already knows which ACPI > > > device object to bind during PNPACPI device enumeration. > > > > > > This patch removes acpi_pnp_bus and does the binding by invoking > > > acpi_bind_one() directly after device enumerated. > > > > > > This also fixes a bug in the previous code that some PNPACPI devices failed > > > to be bound because > > > 1. the ACPI device _HID is not pnpid, e.g. "MSFT0001", but its _CID is, > > > e.g. "PNP0303", thus ACPI _CID is used as the pnp device device id. > > > 2. device is bound only if the pnp device id matches the ACPI device _HID. > > > > > > Tested-by: Prigent Christophe <christophe.prigent@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Does this fix a regression? > > Hmmm, no, the problem exists in all previous kernel versions IMO. OK, so it is applicable to -stable too? Or would it need to be backported? > > If so, do we need it in 3.16? > > > Not necessarily, but as this is a bug fix, so I think it is reasonable > to be shipped in 3.16, right? Basically, yes. Rafael -- 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
