Hi Rafael,

On 5/11/2017 10:52 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> OK. I'll reach out to Harb and let's see where the proposal goes. 
> It looks like this is about operation regions after all, however, so _DEP as 
> is
> should be sufficient here.
> 
> There is some limited _DEP support in the ACPI layer, but we were missing
> a way to represent those dependencies in the driver core.
> 
> That can be done through device_link objects now, so we may be able to support
> _DEP in a more meaningful way, but the cases when _DEP is used for something
> different from operation regions in practice need to be treated with caution.
> 
> 

_DEP could certainly help here. However, _DEP doesn't answer the loose binding 
question.
If one driver is missing in one operating system, _GED driver will never load 
due 
to unsatisfied dependency. This forces us into all or none condition. We have 
operating
systems that we need to support and do not have vendor I2C or GPIO drivers. 
That's why,
we are hesitant to place _DEP into ACPI tables.

The problem is that there is no concept of per event dependency. This could 
have helped
us figure out if such an interrupt should be enabled or not.

Another solution for operating regions is _REG if FW wants to ignore the event 
during
boot. This is the one we are looking into at this moment for non-critical 
events. 

late_init proposed in this patch helps for built-in drivers such as GHES where 
we do
not want to ignore events. Since GHES is not an actual device, this has to be 
solved
in ACPI.


Sinan

-- 
Sinan Kaya
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm 
Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux 
Foundation Collaborative Project.

Reply via email to