lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Dec]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/16] ACPI: Rework ACPI namespace scanning for devices
From
Date
Hi Rafael,

The changes look very good. It's much cleaner and consistent. :-) For
the series:

Acked-by: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hp.com>

Thanks,
-Toshi


On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 02:45 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've finally cut the patches removing acpi_pci_bind() and acpi_pci_unbind(),
> so I'm kind of ready to post the entire series reworking the ACPI namespace
> scanning code.
>
> Patches [1-6/16] are essentially these ones:
>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1889821/
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1876481/
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1876531/
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1876571/
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1876511/
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1876401/
>
> but [2-6/16] have been rebased on top of the first one.
>
> Patches [7-12/16] are essentially these:
>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1884721/
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1884701/
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1884761/
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1884731/
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1884751/
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1884661/
>
> but they have been rebased on top of https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/1889821/.
> I added Yinghai's ACKs to them tentatively, although they are a bit different
> from the previous versions. The difference is not too important, however,
> because the following patches finally remove the acpi_pci_bind()/acpi_pci_unbind()
> stuff:
>
> [13/16] Add .setup() and .cleanup() callbacks to struct acpi_bus_type.
> [14/16] Rework the setup and cleanup of ACPI/PCI device wakeup.
> [15/16] Move the _PRT setup and cleanup code to pci-acpi.c.
> [16/16] Drop ACPI device .bind() and .unbind() callbacks.
>
> This is done a bit differently than I thought it would be, mostly because the
> _PRT-related operations require the "subordinate" pointers of bridges to be
> populated. I think it may be possible to simplify this further if that
> requirement can be removed (I haven't looked into that).
>
> In fact, patches [13-15/16] do not essentially depend on [1-12/16], only the
> last one does.
>
> The patches are on top of my master branch and I'm going to rebase them when
> v3.8-rc1 is out.
>
> There is a git tree you can pull them from at:
>
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git;a=summary acpi-scan-temp-new
>
> It's v3.7 with my master branch merged and the new patches on top.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Rafael
>
>




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-12-20 23:01    [W:0.286 / U:0.060 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site