On 4/16/15 20:45, Zheng, Lv wrote:
Before back porting this to ACPICA, let me ask one simple question.
According to the spec, the _CLS is optional and PCI specific.
So why should we implement it in ACPICA core not OSPM specific modules?
If this need to be implemented in ACPICA, then what about the following device identification objects?
_DDN, _HRV, _MLS, _PLD, _STR, _SUN
Thanks and best regards
-Lv
Hi,
Sorry for late reply. As for the justification for introducing the _CLS
support in the ACPICA, this is mainly because ACPI does not currently
define _CID for certain device classes, which used to mostly be PCI
devices. Instead, ACPI spec mentioned that _CLS can be used for loading
generic drivers on hardware that is compatible with PCI-defined device
classes, but that is not implemented on the PCI bus (and is therefore
enumerated by ACPI.)
The code introduced for supporting _CLS is also similar in the way
ACPICA is currently parsing the _CID or _SUB (which are also optional),
and using it for the same purpose of identifying devices for loading
drivers.
Also, since this method for identifying devices is OS-independent, I
believe this should not be done in the OSPM specific modules.
Thanks,
Suravee
--
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
