On Tuesday, February 14, 2012, Zhang Rui wrote: > On 一, 2012-02-13 at 21:48 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Monday, February 13, 2012, Lin Ming wrote: > > > From: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > ACPI Power Resource can power on/off a couple of devices. > > > Introduce interfaces to register/unregister a device to/from > > > an ACPI Power Resource. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@xxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > drivers/acpi/power.c | 128 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > include/acpi/acpi_bus.h | 2 + > > > 2 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/power.c b/drivers/acpi/power.c > > > index 0d681fb..a7e2305 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/acpi/power.c > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/power.c > > > @@ -84,10 +84,25 @@ struct acpi_power_resource { > > > u32 order; > > > unsigned int ref_count; > > > struct mutex resource_lock; > > > + struct list_head devices; /* list for devices powered by this PR */ > > > }; > > > > > > static struct list_head acpi_power_resource_list; > > > > > > +/* > > > + * When a power resource is turned on, all the devices are put to an uninitialized > > > + * state although their ACPI states are still D0. > > > + * To handle this, we need to keep a list of all devices powered by the power resource, > > > + * and resume all of them. > > > + * Currently, we only support this case: > > > + * 1) multiple devices share the same power resoruce, > > > + * 2) One device uses One Power Resource ONLY. > > > > This is incorrect. We actually support all combinations. > > Agreed. > > > However, we don't > > generally support checking what devices depend on the given power resource. > > > Yes. > But all the code in this patch is for runtime D3_COLD support only. > At least for the BIOS code on hand, a device that support runtime > D3_COLD uses one ACPI Power Resource only. > We can add the support for all combinations if there are such kind of > BIOS in the market, which I do not think there would be. > > Besides, as a RFC version, I do not want to make a over designed > proposal at the beginning. > > > > + */ > > > +struct acpi_powered_device { > > > + struct list_head node; > > > + struct device *dev; > > > +}; > > > + > > > /* -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Power Resource Management > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- */ > > > @@ -455,6 +470,118 @@ int acpi_disable_wakeup_device_power(struct acpi_device *dev) > > > Device Power Management > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- */ > > > > > > +int acpi_power_resource_register_device(struct device *dev, acpi_handle handle) > > > +{ > > > + struct acpi_power_resource *resource; > > > + struct acpi_device *acpi_dev, *res_dev; > > > + acpi_handle res_handle = NULL; > > > + struct acpi_powered_device *apd; > > > + int i; > > > + int ret; > > > + > > > + if (!handle || !dev) > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + > > > + ret = acpi_bus_get_device(handle, &acpi_dev); > > > + if (ret) > > > + goto no_power_resource; > > > + > > > + if (!acpi_dev->power.flags.power_resources) > > > + goto no_power_resource; > > > + > > > + for (i = 0; i <= ACPI_STATE_D3; i++) { > > > + struct acpi_device_power_state *ps = &acpi_dev->power.states[i]; > > > + > > > + if (!ps->flags.valid) > > > + continue; > > > + > > > + if (ps->resources.count > 1) > > > + return 0; > > > + > > > + if (!res_handle) > > > + res_handle = ps->resources.handles[0]; > > > + else if (res_handle != ps->resources.handles[0]) > > > + return 0; > > > + } > > > > I'm not sure what the above checks are needed for. It seems that this function > > will only be called from acpi_bus_add_power_resource() (which needs to be > > modified for this purpose, BTW), so it doesn't need to check all those things > > (those checks have been made already). > > > No. These two APIs are introduced to support the runtime D3_COLD remote > wakeup. And they should be invoked by drivers, either in driver code or > via bus layer code. > > Say, ATA port, who has _PR3 in its ACPI node, knows that it can enter > D3_COLD at run time, and it supports remote wakeup in D3_COLD because it > has _S0W (return value 4). > When remote wakeup event is triggered, there is an ACPI event sent to > the ATA controller/port, which sets the ATA controller/port back to D0 > state. > At this time, what we actually need is to resume the ZPODD, rather than > the ATA controller/port. To follow the runtime PM model (runtime resume > starts from leaf devices), Well, this isn't the case. Parents are always resumed first. > ATA code can use these two APIs to tell ACPI > to runtime resume ZPODD device directly, because ZPODD is powered by > this Power Resource as well. I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to achieve and what you mean by "resume a device directly"? Do you want to run the device's resume callback at the time when another device is being resumed? Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html