From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 23 02:09:45 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: acpi@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECD0316A482; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:09:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nate@root.org) Received: from pimout5-ext.prodigy.net (pimout5-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.63.73]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2364043D53; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:09:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nate@root.org) X-ORBL: [71.139.104.128] Received: from [10.0.5.51] (ppp-71-139-104-128.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [71.139.104.128]) by pimout5-ext.prodigy.net (8.13.6 out.dk/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k5N29gS9068276; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 22:09:43 -0400 Message-ID: <449B4CF5.6040603@root.org> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 19:07:49 -0700 From: Nate Lawson User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060501) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Moore, Robert" References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: acpi@freebsd.org, iwasaki@freebsd.org Subject: Re: patch for acpi_dock X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 02:09:46 -0000 I agree, I was just wondering if he found some dock device that behaved differently than the standard says. Not that there *ever* has been one of those before. ;-) Moore, Robert wrote: > Yes, if _STA is not present, device is assumed to be "present" and > "functional". > > Bob > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- >> acpi@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Nate Lawson >> Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 11:15 AM >> To: iwasaki@freebsd.org >> Cc: acpi@freebsd.org >> Subject: patch for acpi_dock >> >> Iwasaki-san, >> >> I've done some minor cleanups in acpi_dock, please make sure it still >> works for you as I realize my docking station (T23) is handled by SMI >> even though an acpi_dock0 device appears. >> >> Attached is a patch that improves it a little also. The main changes >> are getting rid of the global acpi_dock_status and changing _STA > behavior. >> For the first one, it seems the goal was to prevent duplicate > attachment >> of docking station devices and duplicate notifies. Duplicate > attachment >> should never happen since newbus probe/attach should prevent reprobe >> after we return 0. Is that not the case for you? For the second one, >> it seems the locking and ordering on the taskq should be sufficient > that >> even if multiple notifies come in, we will handle them sequentially. > Is >> there something I'm missing here? >> >> For _STA behavior, I added a check for the _STA method not being >> present. I think even for dock devices, if the method is not present, >> the device is always there as part of the docking station. What do > you >> think? >> >> Thanks, >> -- >> Nate -- Nate