On 04/09/2014 01:09 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 13:02 -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote: >> >> On 04/09/2014 12:36 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: >>> On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 12:22 -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote: >>>> RFC and a work in progress ... I need to go through and do a bunch of error >>>> condition checking, more testing, etc. I'm just throwing this out there >>>> to see >>>> if anyone has any major concerns about doing something like this. >>> >>> This isn't really a good approach. These aren't standardised ACPI >>> methods, so you have no guarantee that they exist. The fact that a >> >> I've looked at the ACPI dump across six different systems (3 different >> vendors, >> and an intel whitebox), and the data appears to be identical. Could Intel >> change these? Yes, of course they could, but that's no different from any >> other >> undocumented driver in the kernel. > > Not really. These are an internal implementation detail, not an exported > interface. We try to write drivers for exported interfaces, even if > they're not documented. > >>> method with one of these names exists is no guarantee that it has the >>> same behaviour as the ones on your board. There's no guarantee that >>> you're not racing against the firmware. >>> >> >> I think there is -- AFAICT the operations are serialized; if they aren't >> that is >> an associated risk. Hopefully someone from Intel will lend a hand here and >> let >> me know if I'm doing something horrible ;) > > Imagine an i2c chip with indexed register access. What stops: > > CPU0 (i2c): CPU1 (ACPI): > SBWB register address > SBWB register address > SBRB register value > SBRB register value >
Your example is no different from what we've told people to do right now when they see the ACPI resource conflict message and use a kernel parameter to override the error condition. I'm not disputing that this could be a problem -- see my previous comment about hoping that someone @ Intel will let us know if we're doing something horrible. P. > and CPU0 getting back the wrong value? > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
