On Thu, 2012-12-06 at 22:48 -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > The "ACPI Hot Plug PCI Controller ("acpiphp")" sub-driver may be compiled
> > as a module. Kernel modules are instantiated somewhat randomly - the
> > order in which they are linked as the kernel as built - thus if there are
> > any dependencies on the ordering of attaching sub-drivers, they can not be
> > effectively dealt with.
> >
> > This patch series resolves any potential sequencing inter-dependencies by
> > converting "acpiphp" sub-driver's functionality to being only supported as
> > statically built-in to the kernel. Inter-dependencies can then be
> > effectively handled by explicitly sequencing the addition of such
> > functionality.
>
> some slots may support both acpiphp and pciehp.
>
> if make acpiphp to be built-in, user do not have choice anymore.
What area are you worried about and how do we exercise that choice
today?
Here is my current understanding to set a little context -
I see the following call chains with respect to pciehp and acpiphp:
pcied_init # pciehp module_init
pciehp_firmware_init
pciehp_acpi_slot_detection_init
parse_detect_mode #pcie, acpi, auto (default)
pcie_port_service_register
acpiphp_init # module_init
init_acpi
acpiphp_glue_init
acpi_pci_register_driver(&acpi_pci_hp_driver)
list_for_each_entry(root, &acpi_pci_roots, node)
driver->add # for \_SB_.PCI0
add_bridge
add_host_bridge
bridge = kzalloc(struct acpiphp_bridge)
bridge->handle = handle # \_SB_.PCI0
bridge->pci_bus = root_bus #pci_bus 0000:00
init_bridge_misc
acpi_walk_namespace(..., register_slot, ...)
register_slot
if (device_is_managed_by_native_pciehp(pdev))
return AE_OK
Does pciehp influence device_is_managed_by_native_pciehp()? If not, it
seems that the acpiphp driver will never attach.
Looking at ./drivers/pci/hotplug/Makefile, CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI_PCIE comes
before CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI_ACPI so if pciehp and acpiphp are both
configured as modules then the load order would seem to be:
acpiphp, pciehp: acpiphp ignores, pciehp claims
pciehp, acpiphp: pciehp claims, acpiphp ignores
To complete the matrix taking built-in vs. module into account -
pciehp=y, acpiphp=y
pciehp, acpiphp: pciehp claims, acpiphp ignores
pciehp=y, acpiphp=m
pciehp, acpiphp: pciehp claims, acpiphp ignores
pciehp=m, acpiphp=y
acpiphp, pciehp: acpiphp ignores, pciehp claims
The above combinations all seem to end up with pciehp claiming the slot
which raises the question: How do we get acpiphp to claim a slot today?
Thanks,
Myron
>
> Thanks
>
> Yinghai
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
