On Tuesday, December 18, 2012 10:59:46 AM Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@xxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 2012-12-18 at 02:48 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > So, I would propose the following changes. > > > > - Move the acpi_hot_add_bind() call back to the original place after > > the device_attach() call. > > - Rename the name of acpi_hot_add_bind() to something like > > acpi_bind_adr_device() since it is no longer hot-add only (and is > > specific to _ADR devices). > > - Create its pair function, acpi_unbind_adr_device(), which is called > > from acpi_bus_remove(). When a constructor interface is introduced, its > > destructor should be introduced as well. > > - Remove the binding procedure from acpi_pci_root_add(). This should > > be done in patch [2/6]. > > i think we should put jiang four patches before Rafael's patches. > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/yinghai/linux-yinghai.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/for-pci-jiang-hotplug Actually, I have something more radical than that in mind. :-) Namely, we don't need to call the wakeup-related stuff from acpi_pci_bind() and acpi_pci_unbind(). It's only there, because I did't find a better place for it when I added it. If we can set the ACPI handles of PCI devices in pci_scan_device(), which isn't too difficult to do (I actually have a patch for that and it's not too invasive), we can easily move the wakeup enabling stuff to pci_pm_init() and wakeup disabling somewhere near pci_release_capabilities(). Then we are only left with the _PRT setup in there, but that could be done as soon as in pci_scan_device() too, if I'm not mistaken. Thanks, Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. -- 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
