Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932333AbbERQTK (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 May 2015 12:19:10 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55776 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932184AbbERQTB (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 May 2015 12:19:01 -0400 Message-ID: <555A1093.40303@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 12:17:23 -0400 From: Jarod Wilson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Bjorn Helgaas CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Len Brown , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] pci/hotplug: work-around for missing _RMV on HP ZBook G2 References: <1431632038-39917-1-git-send-email-jarod@redhat.com> <20150516143750.GG31666@google.com> <20150516144155.GH31666@google.com> <1481007.OlNlbgiUPd@vostro.rjw.lan> <5559F824.1020703@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <5559F824.1020703@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2424 Lines: 57 On 5/18/2015 10:33 AM, Jarod Wilson wrote: > On 5/17/2015 8:26 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Saturday, May 16, 2015 09:41:55 AM Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >>> On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 09:37:50AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >>>> Hi Jarod, >>>> >>>> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 03:33:58PM -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: >>>>> The HP ZBook 15 and 17 Mobile Workstations, generation 2, up to and >>>>> including at least BIOS revision 01.07, do not have an ACPI _RMV >>>>> object >>>>> associated with their expresscard slots, so acpi-based hotplug-capable >>>>> slot detection fails. If we fall back to pcie-based detection, the >>>>> systems >>>>> work just fine, so this uses dmi matching to do that. With luck, a >>>>> future >>>>> BIOS will remedy this (I've let someone at HP know about the problem), >>>>> but for now, just use this for all existing versions. > ... >>>> Oh, my goodness. I forgot how terrible this path is. Can anyone >>>> write a >>>> simple explanation of how we choose to use acpiphp or pciehp? >> >> In theory, that should depend on the _OSC handshake in >> acpi_pci_root_add(). >> >> If the firmware doesn't give us control of the PCIe features, we'll >> not use >> pciehp (or at least that's the idea). >> >> acpiphp is used if pciehp doesn't claim the device, AFAICS. > > [ 4.013326] acpi PNP0A08:00: _OSC: OS supports [ExtendedConfig ASPM > ClockPM Segments MSI] > [ 4.015860] acpi PNP0A08:00: _OSC: OS now controls [PCIeHotplug PME > AER PCIeCapability] > > So at a glance, it would appear that pciehp *should* be claiming it, > right? Something I noted in the bug I filed is that the device ID > reported there is PNP0A08, and the root_device_id table that associates > with acpi_pci_root_add() only includes PNP0A03 in it. Is that correct, > or should 08 also be in there, which might remedy this? (I can test this > out easily enough). Nope, makes no difference, seems those are just two different references to the same bus, based on a peek at the extracted dsdt: Name (_HID, EisaId ("PNP0A08") /* PCI Express Bus */) // _HID: Hardware ID Name (_CID, EisaId ("PNP0A03") /* PCI Bus */) // _CID: Compatible ID -- Jarod Wilson jarod@redhat.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/