Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756854AbYCNFmJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Mar 2008 01:42:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752238AbYCNFly (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Mar 2008 01:41:54 -0400 Received: from fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.36]:45517 "EHLO fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752023AbYCNFlx (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Mar 2008 01:41:53 -0400 Message-ID: <47DA0E77.9010706@jp.fujitsu.com> Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 14:34:47 +0900 From: Kenji Kaneshige User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gary Hade , Alex Chiang , Kristen Carlson Accardi CC: Greg KH , Jesse Barnes , Matthew Wilcox , warthog19@eaglescrag.net, rick.jones2@hp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] ACPI PCI slot detection driver References: <200803041018.29035.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org> <20080304193036.GB5534@suse.de> <20080304230937.GD3694@ldl.fc.hp.com> <47CDF339.3060304@jp.fujitsu.com> <20080305202052.GN3694@ldl.fc.hp.com> <47D684D0.6060200@jp.fujitsu.com> <20080311110403.7db9527c@appleyard> <20080311191406.GB29344@ldl.fc.hp.com> <47D7BF6C.3080306@jp.fujitsu.com> <20080313032410.GA17561@ldl.fc.hp.com> <20080314021646.GC6145@us.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20080314021646.GC6145@us.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; 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: 9624 Lines: 210 Alex-san, Gary-san and Kristen-san, Thank you for your explanation. Ok, I understood what you mean and I agreed both implementations are legal. Also I explained it to our firmware team, and they understood your situation. I don't know which implementation is more popular. But according to the current score (2 : 1), you win the "majority rule". Alex-san, could you send me the updated patches? I'll Ack the patch after adding Fujitsu firmware versions to the DMI list and testing it. Kristen-san, as I told you in another thread, we might need a same fix for acpiphp driver. I'll check it and send the patch. Thanks, Kenji Kaneshige Gary Hade wrote: > Hi Alex/Kenji-san, > > Time for my 2 cents. > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 09:24:10PM -0600, Alex Chiang wrote: >> Hi Kenji-san, >> >> * Kenji Kaneshige : >>> Hi Alex-san, >>> >>>> On my machine, it is legal to evaluate S1F0._SUN independent of >>>> S1F0._STA because L001._INI has already been evaluated. >>>> It would be helpful to know what Fujitsu's namespace looks like. >>>> If Fujitsu slot objects contain _STA and _INI, then I agree with >>>> Kenji-san -- I definitely need to check _STA before evaluating >>>> _SUN. >>> Thank you for explanation. Maybe I understood the summary of >>> implementation of HP firmware. But how to use or where to put _INI >>> method in the ACPI namespace never becomes reasonable reason why >>> your driver may ignore _STA before evaluating _SUN. >>> >>>> But in any case, I think both HP and Fujitsu firmware are doing >>>> legal things -- neither firmware is breaking the spec. >>> My understanding of your explanation so far is: >>> >>> - evaluating _SUN without checking _STA doesn't cause problem, >>> from the view point of HP's implementation. >>> - some IBM machine is doing same as HP >>> >>> I never think those are reasonable reasons why ignoring _STA >>> before evaluating _SUN is legal. Am I missing something? >> I think the piece that I did not explain clearly is that the spec >> does not require checking _STA immediately before _SUN. The spec >> says: >> >> - you must check _STA before calling _INI > Agreed. > >> - _INI must be called to initialize _SUN > Based on my review of ACPI spec 3.0b I would add: > 1. For a specific device that has only _STA and _SUN methods, > _SUN can be run and it's results can be trusted irrespective > of the _STA return value. > 2. For a specific device that has _STA, _INI, and _SUN methods, > _SUN can be run and it's results can be trusted even if > _INI is not run because the device is absent. If the device > is present and _INI is run then _SUN cannot be run until > after _INI is run. > > See ACPI spec 3.0b "6.1.8 _SUN (Slot User Number)" which > says nothing about a required presence of the device. > >> - _INI is called once, when the table is loaded > Agreed. > >> On HP's implementation, we do obey those rules. We call _INI on >> the PCI bridge during boot, which then initializes the children >> SxFy objects. From that point on, it is legal for us to call >> _SUN. >> >> The other issue is that the spec does not specify the *semantics* >> of _STA. P/IBM firmware engineers think _STA should indicate card >> presence, > > I checked this on the IBM x3850 and it appears to be true. I > instrumented register_slot() in drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c > to print _STA and _SUN returns and got the following results with > slot 1 (PCI-X) populated, slot 2 (PCI-X) vacant, slot 3 (PCIe) vacant, > slot 4 (PCIe) populated, slot 5 (PCIe) vacant, and slot 6 (PCIe) > populated. When a card is present _STA returns non-zero status > for all functions, otherwise it returns zero. None of the SxFy > devices have an _INI method. > > acpiphp: ACPI Hot Plug PCI Controller Driver version: 0.5 > acpiphp_glue: found PCI host-bus bridge with hot-pluggable slots > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP02.S1F0 sta=0 sun=1 > acpiphp_glue: found ACPI PCI Hotplug slot 1 at PCI 0000:02:01 > acpiphp: Slot [1] registered > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP02.S1F1 sta=0 sun=1 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP02.S1F2 sta=0 sun=1 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP02.S1F3 sta=0 sun=1 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP02.S1F4 sta=0 sun=1 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP02.S1F5 sta=0 sun=1 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP02.S1F6 sta=0 sun=1 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP02.S1F7 sta=0 sun=1 > acpiphp_glue: found PCI host-bus bridge with hot-pluggable slots > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP03.S2F0 sta=f sun=2 > acpiphp_glue: found ACPI PCI Hotplug slot 2 at PCI 0000:06:01 > acpiphp: Slot [2] registered > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP03.S2F1 sta=f sun=2 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP03.S2F2 sta=f sun=2 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP03.S2F3 sta=f sun=2 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP03.S2F4 sta=f sun=2 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP03.S2F5 sta=f sun=2 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP03.S2F6 sta=f sun=2 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP03.S2F7 sta=f sun=2 > acpiphp_glue: found PCI-to-PCI bridge at PCI 0000:0a:00.0 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP04.CALG.E3F0 sta=0 sun=3 > acpiphp_glue: found ACPI PCI Hotplug slot 3 at PCI 0000:0b:00 > acpiphp: Slot [3] registered > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP04.CALG.E3F1 sta=0 sun=3 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP04.CALG.E3F2 sta=0 sun=3 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP04.CALG.E3F3 sta=0 sun=3 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP04.CALG.E3F4 sta=0 sun=3 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP04.CALG.E3F5 sta=0 sun=3 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP04.CALG.E3F6 sta=0 sun=3 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP04.CALG.E3F7 sta=0 sun=3 > acpiphp_glue: found PCI-to-PCI bridge at PCI 0000:0f:00.0 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP05.CALG.E4F0 sta=f sun=4 > acpiphp_glue: found ACPI PCI Hotplug slot 4 at PCI 0000:10:00 > acpiphp: Slot [4] registered > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP05.CALG.E4F1 sta=f sun=4 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP05.CALG.E4F2 sta=f sun=4 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP05.CALG.E4F3 sta=f sun=4 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP05.CALG.E4F4 sta=f sun=4 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP05.CALG.E4F5 sta=f sun=4 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP05.CALG.E4F6 sta=f sun=4 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP05.CALG.E4F7 sta=f sun=4 > acpiphp_glue: found PCI-to-PCI bridge at PCI 0000:14:00.0 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP06.CALG.E5F0 sta=0 sun=5 > acpiphp_glue: found ACPI PCI Hotplug slot 5 at PCI 0000:15:00 > acpiphp: Slot [5] registered > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP06.CALG.E5F1 sta=0 sun=5 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP06.CALG.E5F2 sta=0 sun=5 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP06.CALG.E5F3 sta=0 sun=5 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP06.CALG.E5F4 sta=0 sun=5 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP06.CALG.E5F5 sta=0 sun=5 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP06.CALG.E5F6 sta=0 sun=5 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP06.CALG.E5F7 sta=0 sun=5 > acpiphp_glue: found PCI-to-PCI bridge at PCI 0000:19:00.0 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP07.CALG.E6F0 sta=f sun=6 > acpiphp_glue: found ACPI PCI Hotplug slot 6 at PCI 0000:1a:00 > acpiphp: Slot [6] registered > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP07.CALG.E6F1 sta=f sun=6 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP07.CALG.E6F2 sta=f sun=6 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP07.CALG.E6F3 sta=f sun=6 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP07.CALG.E6F4 sta=f sun=6 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP07.CALG.E6F5 sta=f sun=6 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP07.CALG.E6F6 sta=f sun=6 > acpiphp_glue: register_slot: \_SB_.VP07.CALG.E6F7 sta=f sun=6 > acpiphp_glue: Bus 0000:1a has 1 slot > acpiphp_glue: Bus 0000:15 has 1 slot > acpiphp_glue: Bus 0000:10 has 1 slot > acpiphp_glue: Bus 0000:0b has 1 slot > acpiphp_glue: Bus 0000:06 has 1 slot > acpiphp_glue: Bus 0000:02 has 1 slot > acpiphp_glue: Total 6 slots > >> but Fujitsu firmware engineers think _STA should >> indicate slot presence. >> >> I don't think either firmware team is incorrect -- it is simply >> the case that the specification was not precise enough, to the >> point where separate teams following the same spec came up with >> implementations with different behaviors and different semantics. >> >> I believe that we both have compliant, legal firmware. >> >>>> If one list is shorter than the other, then that should be the >>>> list to put in the kernel, and the default behavior should be >>>> "majority rule". >>> I don't want to consider "majority rule" before I understand why >>> ignoring _STA is legal. >> On HP and IBM machines, it *is* legal because we *did* call _STA, >> then _INI, then _SUN. That is one interpretation of the spec. >> >> On Fujitsu machines, the semantics of _STA are different, and it >> is not legal to ignore _STA. That is another interpretation of >> the spec. > > I am not convinced that this a correct interpretation. I believe > that the ACPI spec indicates that it is legal to call _SUN and > trust it's results no matter what _STA returns. I believe the > only constraint on running _SUN is that it be run after _INI is run > if _INI exists for the same device and _STA for that device > indicates that it should be run. > > Gary > -- 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/