Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 17:55:00 -0700 (MST) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: jhb@freebsd.org Cc: nate@root.org Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 43464 for review Message-ID: <20031208.175500.36934037.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20031208155247.jhb@FreeBSD.org> References: <20031205152304.D27817@root.org> <XFMail.20031208155247.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
In message: <XFMail.20031208155247.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> writes:
:
: On 05-Dec-2003 Nate Lawson wrote:
: > On Fri, 5 Dec 2003, John Baldwin wrote:
: >> Change 43464 by jhb@jhb_blue on 2003/12/05 12:59:01
: >>
: >> More updates. Closer to working than I thought. In theory
: >> PCI devices should all just work now.
: >
: > This handles PCI. Are you ok with me adding the call to
: > acpi_pwr_switch_consumer() for non-PCI devices like the embedded
: > controller? I think we need to do this at the top \\_SB level. I'm a bit
: > confused as to the handoff between the general tree walk and the ACPI-PCI
: > driver though.
:
: It won't hurt to switch a device on twice. It should be ok to
: do a top-level tree walk of all device objects and turn them on
: before probing child devices I think. ACPI shouldn't turn off
: devices that don't probe like PCI does though because ACPI has
: duplicate objects of things like the entire PCI device tree. :-/
Actually, there can be times when you don't want to turn on devices at
all. Walking the whole tree turning them on might be the wrong to
do...
Sometimes I think that things in the newbus tree should have a pointer
to the acpi power methods that are used in coordination with the bus
code that is 'activating' the device before the 'probe' and 'attach'
happens.
Warner
home |
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031208.175500.36934037.imp>