Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>, Len Brown <lenb@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <linux-acpi@...>, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...>, Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...>, Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...>
On Tuesday 24 June 2008 07:37:37 pm Zhao Yakui wrote:
I think most current uses of acpi_walk_namespace() are indications
that the ACPI or PNP core is missing something.
In dock_init() and bay_init(), it's used to bind a driver to a
device. I think it would be better if we could figure out how to
use the usual acpi_bus_register_driver() interface. Actually, it
looks like this is already 90% done: acpi_dock_match() does the
same thing as is_dock(), so it looks like dock_init() could easily
be converted to register as a driver for ACPI_DOCK_HID.
bay_init() looks similar, with acpi_bay_match(), is_ejectable_bay(),
ACPI_BAY_HID, etc.
Other users of acpi_walk_namespace() are often to install notify
handlers to deal with add/remove events. I think these are telling
us that we need to implement the "TBD: Handle device insertion/removal"
pieces in acpi_bus_check_device().
Yes (via rtc_wake_setup()). I think this should be moved into the
RTC driver itself. I have some ideas on how to do this; I'll post
a patch in a few days. But for 2.6.26, I think the minimal fix of
checking acpi_disabled in acpi_rtc_init() is better.
Bjorn
--
