Re: [PATCH 1/6] PCI: acpiphp: do not check for SLOT_ENABLED inenable_device()

[Mika Westerberg]

On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 10:29:12PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 02, 2013 10:40:39 AM Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Monday, July 01, 2013 09:36:13 PM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 04:01:37PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >> > > Given the fact that SLOT_ENABLED is only checked in acpiphp_enable_slot()
> > >> > > (after this patch) and that /sys/bus/pci/slots/*/power uses SLOT_POWEREDON
> > >> > > anyway, should we remove the whole flag?
> > >> >
> > >> > Sure, if it is not necessary any more, we should remove it.
> > >>
> > >> Well, there is one thing that changes due that. Once the flag is gone
> > >> userspace can do 'echo 1 > /sys/bus/pci/slots/*/power' several times and
> > >> the slot is always re-enumerated.
> > >>
> > >> If that is not acceptable we should probably move the SLOT_ENABLED check
> > >> closer to acpiphp_core:enable_device() and drop it from here, so that we
> > >> always re-enumerate on Bus Check event but userspace can only do enable
> > >> once (we still re-enumerate on Bus Check).
> > >
> > > Yes, that sounds like the right thing to do.
> > 
> > Is it actually a problem if we re-enumerate every time userspace does
> > 'echo 1 > /sys/bus/pci/slots/*/power'?  I assume re-enumeration is a
> > no-op if nothing has changed.
> 
> Well, if it's a no-op in that case, then re-enumerating shouldn't be a problem,
> but is it a no-op?

I can confirm that it's a no-op (at least for the Thunderbolt case).
Basically we just scan for new devices and nothing is to be found.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/