Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] Improve container_notify_cb() to support container hot-remove.
On 11/02/2012 12:43 AM, Toshi Kani wrote: Hi Tang, Rafael pointed out in my CPU hot-remove patch that acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() was not exported for modules. Looks like you have the same problem here. FYI, I just sent the following patch that exports acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() and acpi_os_hotplug_execute(). https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/1/225 Hi Toshi, I see. Thanks for the info. :) Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] Improve container_notify_cb() to support container hot-remove.
On Thursday, November 01, 2012 04:39:50 PM Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > From: Rafael J. Wysocki
> > Subject: ACPI: Make seemingly useless check in osl.c more understandable
> >
> > There is a seemingly useless check in drivers/acpi/osl.c added by
> > commit bc73675 (ACPI: fixes a false alarm from lockdep), which really
> > is necessary to avoid false positive lockdep complaints. Document
> > this and rearrange the code related to it so that it makes fewer
> > checks.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki
> > ---
> > drivers/acpi/osl.c | 21 ++---
> > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > Index: linux/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> > ===
> > --- linux.orig/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> > +++ linux/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> > @@ -944,17 +944,24 @@ static acpi_status __acpi_os_execute(acp
> > * because the hotplug code may call driver .remove() functions,
> > * which invoke flush_scheduled_work/acpi_os_wait_events_complete
> > * to flush these workqueues.
> > +*
> > +* To prevent lockdep from complaining unnecessarily, make sure that
> > +* there is a different static lockdep key for each workqueue by
> > using
> > +* INIT_WORK() for each of them separately.
> > */
> > - queue = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
> > - (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq);
> > - dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
> > -
> > - if (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
> > + if (hp) {
> > + queue = kacpi_hotplug_wq;
> > + dpc->wait = 1;
> > INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> > - else if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
> > + } else if (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER) {
> > + queue = kacpi_notify_wq;
> > + dpc->wait = 0;
>
> yes, much clear.
>
> at the same can you changne
> dpc allocation from kmalloc with kzalloc instead.
>
> then we save two lines for dpc->wait = 0
Good idea. :-)
> After that
>
> Acked-by: Yinghai Lu
For completeness:
---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Subject: ACPI: Make seemingly useless check in osl.c more understandable
There is a seemingly useless check in drivers/acpi/osl.c added by
commit bc73675 (ACPI: fixes a false alarm from lockdep), which really
is necessary to avoid false positive lockdep complaints. Document
this and rearrange the code related to it so that it makes fewer
checks.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu
---
drivers/acpi/osl.c | 21 +
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
Index: linux/drivers/acpi/osl.c
===
--- linux.orig/drivers/acpi/osl.c
+++ linux/drivers/acpi/osl.c
@@ -932,7 +932,7 @@ static acpi_status __acpi_os_execute(acp
* having a static work_struct.
*/
- dpc = kmalloc(sizeof(struct acpi_os_dpc), GFP_ATOMIC);
+ dpc = kzalloc(sizeof(struct acpi_os_dpc), GFP_ATOMIC);
if (!dpc)
return AE_NO_MEMORY;
@@ -944,17 +944,22 @@ static acpi_status __acpi_os_execute(acp
* because the hotplug code may call driver .remove() functions,
* which invoke flush_scheduled_work/acpi_os_wait_events_complete
* to flush these workqueues.
+*
+* To prevent lockdep from complaining unnecessarily, make sure that
+* there is a different static lockdep key for each workqueue by using
+* INIT_WORK() for each of them separately.
*/
- queue = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
- (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq);
- dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
-
- if (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
+ if (hp) {
+ queue = kacpi_hotplug_wq;
+ dpc->wait = 1;
INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
- else if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
+ } else if (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER) {
+ queue = kacpi_notify_wq;
INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
- else
+ } else {
+ queue = kacpid_wq;
INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
+ }
/*
* On some machines, a software-initiated SMI causes corruption unless
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] Improve container_notify_cb() to support container hot-remove.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki
> Subject: ACPI: Make seemingly useless check in osl.c more understandable
>
> There is a seemingly useless check in drivers/acpi/osl.c added by
> commit bc73675 (ACPI: fixes a false alarm from lockdep), which really
> is necessary to avoid false positive lockdep complaints. Document
> this and rearrange the code related to it so that it makes fewer
> checks.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki
> ---
> drivers/acpi/osl.c | 21 ++---
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> ===
> --- linux.orig/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> +++ linux/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> @@ -944,17 +944,24 @@ static acpi_status __acpi_os_execute(acp
> * because the hotplug code may call driver .remove() functions,
> * which invoke flush_scheduled_work/acpi_os_wait_events_complete
> * to flush these workqueues.
> +*
> +* To prevent lockdep from complaining unnecessarily, make sure that
> +* there is a different static lockdep key for each workqueue by using
> +* INIT_WORK() for each of them separately.
> */
> - queue = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
> - (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq);
> - dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
> -
> - if (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
> + if (hp) {
> + queue = kacpi_hotplug_wq;
> + dpc->wait = 1;
> INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> - else if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
> + } else if (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER) {
> + queue = kacpi_notify_wq;
> + dpc->wait = 0;
yes, much clear.
at the same can you changne
dpc allocation from kmalloc with kzalloc instead.
then we save two lines for dpc->wait = 0
After that
Acked-by: Yinghai Lu
> INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> - else
> + } else {
> + queue = kacpid_wq;
> + dpc->wait = 0;
> INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> + }
>
> /*
> * On some machines, a software-initiated SMI causes corruption unless
>
> --
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] Improve container_notify_cb() to support container hot-remove.
On Thursday, November 01, 2012 03:15:31 PM Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >> oh, no, that commit should not be reverted. instead we should add some
> >> comment for it...
> >>
> >> that mean : three path, will have three separated static lock dep key
> >> from every INIT_WORK.
> >
> > I see.
> >
> > OK, I'll drop the patch removing it.
> >
> > What about the following comment:
> >
> > "To prevent lockdep from complaining unnecessarily, make sure that there
> > is a different static lockdep key created for each workqueue by using
> > INIT_WORK for each of them separately."
> >
> created ?
>
> how about "defined" ?
>
> or just remove "created"
Yes, that's better.
I suppose that the appended patch may be better still, though.
Thanks,
Rafael
---
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Subject: ACPI: Make seemingly useless check in osl.c more understandable
There is a seemingly useless check in drivers/acpi/osl.c added by
commit bc73675 (ACPI: fixes a false alarm from lockdep), which really
is necessary to avoid false positive lockdep complaints. Document
this and rearrange the code related to it so that it makes fewer
checks.
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki
---
drivers/acpi/osl.c | 21 ++---
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
Index: linux/drivers/acpi/osl.c
===
--- linux.orig/drivers/acpi/osl.c
+++ linux/drivers/acpi/osl.c
@@ -944,17 +944,24 @@ static acpi_status __acpi_os_execute(acp
* because the hotplug code may call driver .remove() functions,
* which invoke flush_scheduled_work/acpi_os_wait_events_complete
* to flush these workqueues.
+*
+* To prevent lockdep from complaining unnecessarily, make sure that
+* there is a different static lockdep key for each workqueue by using
+* INIT_WORK() for each of them separately.
*/
- queue = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
- (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq);
- dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
-
- if (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
+ if (hp) {
+ queue = kacpi_hotplug_wq;
+ dpc->wait = 1;
INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
- else if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
+ } else if (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER) {
+ queue = kacpi_notify_wq;
+ dpc->wait = 0;
INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
- else
+ } else {
+ queue = kacpid_wq;
+ dpc->wait = 0;
INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
+ }
/*
* On some machines, a software-initiated SMI causes corruption unless
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] Improve container_notify_cb() to support container hot-remove.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> oh, no, that commit should not be reverted. instead we should add some >> comment for it... >> >> that mean : three path, will have three separated static lock dep key >> from every INIT_WORK. > > I see. > > OK, I'll drop the patch removing it. > > What about the following comment: > > "To prevent lockdep from complaining unnecessarily, make sure that there > is a different static lockdep key created for each workqueue by using > INIT_WORK for each of them separately." > created ? how about "defined" ? or just remove "created" -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] Improve container_notify_cb() to support container hot-remove.
> > >> Hi Yinghai, > > >> > > >> Per the following thread, the code seems to be written in this way to > > >> allocate a separate lock_class_key for each work queue. It should have > > >> had some comment to explain this, though. > > >> > > >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/12/13/304 > > > > > > The code has evolved since then, however, so that it doesn't make sense > > > any more. > > > > > > > oh, no, that commit should not be reverted. instead we should add some > > comment for it... > > > > that mean : three path, will have three separated static lock dep key > > from every INIT_WORK. > > I see. > > OK, I'll drop the patch removing it. > > What about the following comment: > > "To prevent lockdep from complaining unnecessarily, make sure that there > is a different static lockdep key created for each workqueue by using > INIT_WORK for each of them separately." Looks good to me. Thanks, -Toshi > > Thanks, > Rafael > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] Improve container_notify_cb() to support container hot-remove.
On Thursday, November 01, 2012 01:16:22 PM Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 01, 2012 01:17:58 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2012-11-01 at 11:28 -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Toshi Kani wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Rafael pointed out in my CPU hot-remove patch that
> >> > > acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() was not exported for modules. Looks like
> >> > > you have the same problem here. FYI, I just sent the following patch
> >> > > that exports acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() and
> >> > > acpi_os_hotplug_execute().
> >> > >
> >> > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/1/225
> >> >
> >> > acpi_os_hotplug_execute() does not like having good quality yet.
> >> >
> >> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 941) /*
> >> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 942)* We
> >> > can't run hotplug code in keventd_wq/kacpid_wq/kacpid_notify_wq
> >> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 943)*
> >> > because the hotplug code may call driver .remove() functions,
> >> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 944)*
> >> > which invoke flush_scheduled_work/acpi_os_wait_events_complete
> >> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 945)* to
> >> > flush these workqueues.
> >> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 946)*/
> >> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 947) queue
> >> > = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
> >> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 948)
> >> > (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq);
> >> > 9ac61856 (Bjorn Helgaas 2009-08-31 22:32:10 + 949)
> >> > dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
> >> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 950)
> >> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 951) if
> >> > (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
> >> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 952)
> >> > INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> >> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 953) else
> >> > if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
> >> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 954)
> >> > INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> >> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 955) else
> >> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 956)
> >> > INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> >> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 957)
> >> >
> >> > really don't know why checking queue and call same code in every branch.
> >> >
> >> > from comm:
> >> >
> >> > commit bc73675b99fd9850dd914be01d71af99c5d2a1ae
> >> > Author: Zhang Rui
> >> > Date: Mon Mar 22 15:48:54 2010 +0800
> >> >
> >> > ACPI: fixes a false alarm from lockdep
> >> >
> >> > fixes a false alarm from lockdep, as acpi hotplug workqueue waits
> >> > other
> >> > workqueues.
> >> > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14553
> >> > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15521
> >> >
> >> > Original-patch-from: Andrew Morton
> >> > Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li
> >> > Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui
> >> > Signed-off-by: Len Brown
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> >> > index 8e6d866..900da68 100644
> >> > --- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> >> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> >> > @@ -758,7 +758,14 @@ static acpi_status
> >> > __acpi_os_execute(acpi_execute_type type,
> >> > queue = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
> >> > (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq :
> >> > kacpid_wq);
> >> > dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
> >> > - INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> >> > +
> >> > + if (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
> >> > + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> >> > + else if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
> >> > + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> >> > + else
> >> > + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> >> > +
> >> > ret = queue_work(queue, &dpc->work);
> >> >
> >> > if (!ret) {
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Len or Rafael,
> >> > can you just revert that silly patch?
> >>
> >> Hi Yinghai,
> >>
> >> Per the following thread, the code seems to be written in this way to
> >> allocate a separate lock_class_key for each work queue. It should have
> >> had some comment to explain this, though.
> >>
> >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/12/13/304
> >
> > The code has evolved since then, however, so that it doesn't make sense
> > any more.
> >
>
> oh, no, that commit should not be reverted. instead we should add some
> comment for it...
>
> that mean : three path, will have three separated static lock dep key
> from every INIT_WORK.
I see.
OK, I'll drop the patch removing it.
What about the following comment:
"To
Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] Improve container_notify_cb() to support container hot-remove.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, November 01, 2012 01:17:58 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
>> On Thu, 2012-11-01 at 11:28 -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> > On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Toshi Kani wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Rafael pointed out in my CPU hot-remove patch that
>> > > acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() was not exported for modules. Looks like
>> > > you have the same problem here. FYI, I just sent the following patch
>> > > that exports acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() and acpi_os_hotplug_execute().
>> > >
>> > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/1/225
>> >
>> > acpi_os_hotplug_execute() does not like having good quality yet.
>> >
>> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 941) /*
>> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 942)* We
>> > can't run hotplug code in keventd_wq/kacpid_wq/kacpid_notify_wq
>> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 943)*
>> > because the hotplug code may call driver .remove() functions,
>> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 944)*
>> > which invoke flush_scheduled_work/acpi_os_wait_events_complete
>> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 945)* to
>> > flush these workqueues.
>> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 946)*/
>> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 947) queue
>> > = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
>> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 948)
>> > (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq);
>> > 9ac61856 (Bjorn Helgaas 2009-08-31 22:32:10 + 949)
>> > dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
>> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 950)
>> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 951) if
>> > (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
>> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 952)
>> > INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
>> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 953) else
>> > if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
>> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 954)
>> > INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
>> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 955) else
>> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 956)
>> > INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
>> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 957)
>> >
>> > really don't know why checking queue and call same code in every branch.
>> >
>> > from comm:
>> >
>> > commit bc73675b99fd9850dd914be01d71af99c5d2a1ae
>> > Author: Zhang Rui
>> > Date: Mon Mar 22 15:48:54 2010 +0800
>> >
>> > ACPI: fixes a false alarm from lockdep
>> >
>> > fixes a false alarm from lockdep, as acpi hotplug workqueue waits other
>> > workqueues.
>> > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14553
>> > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15521
>> >
>> > Original-patch-from: Andrew Morton
>> > Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li
>> > Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui
>> > Signed-off-by: Len Brown
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
>> > index 8e6d866..900da68 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
>> > @@ -758,7 +758,14 @@ static acpi_status
>> > __acpi_os_execute(acpi_execute_type type,
>> > queue = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
>> > (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq);
>> > dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
>> > - INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
>> > +
>> > + if (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
>> > + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
>> > + else if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
>> > + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
>> > + else
>> > + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
>> > +
>> > ret = queue_work(queue, &dpc->work);
>> >
>> > if (!ret) {
>> >
>> >
>> > Len or Rafael,
>> > can you just revert that silly patch?
>>
>> Hi Yinghai,
>>
>> Per the following thread, the code seems to be written in this way to
>> allocate a separate lock_class_key for each work queue. It should have
>> had some comment to explain this, though.
>>
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/12/13/304
>
> The code has evolved since then, however, so that it doesn't make sense
> any more.
>
oh, no, that commit should not be reverted. instead we should add some
comment for it...
that mean : three path, will have three separated static lock dep key
from every INIT_WORK.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] Improve container_notify_cb() to support container hot-remove.
On Thursday, November 01, 2012 01:17:58 PM Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-11-01 at 11:28 -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > >
> > > Rafael pointed out in my CPU hot-remove patch that
> > > acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() was not exported for modules. Looks like
> > > you have the same problem here. FYI, I just sent the following patch
> > > that exports acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() and acpi_os_hotplug_execute().
> > >
> > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/1/225
> >
> > acpi_os_hotplug_execute() does not like having good quality yet.
> >
> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 941) /*
> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 942)* We
> > can't run hotplug code in keventd_wq/kacpid_wq/kacpid_notify_wq
> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 943)*
> > because the hotplug code may call driver .remove() functions,
> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 944)*
> > which invoke flush_scheduled_work/acpi_os_wait_events_complete
> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 945)* to
> > flush these workqueues.
> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 946)*/
> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 947) queue
> > = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
> > c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 948)
> > (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq);
> > 9ac61856 (Bjorn Helgaas 2009-08-31 22:32:10 + 949)
> > dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 950)
> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 951) if
> > (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 952)
> > INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 953) else
> > if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 954)
> > INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 955) else
> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 956)
> > INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> > bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 957)
> >
> > really don't know why checking queue and call same code in every branch.
> >
> > from comm:
> >
> > commit bc73675b99fd9850dd914be01d71af99c5d2a1ae
> > Author: Zhang Rui
> > Date: Mon Mar 22 15:48:54 2010 +0800
> >
> > ACPI: fixes a false alarm from lockdep
> >
> > fixes a false alarm from lockdep, as acpi hotplug workqueue waits other
> > workqueues.
> > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14553
> > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15521
> >
> > Original-patch-from: Andrew Morton
> > Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li
> > Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui
> > Signed-off-by: Len Brown
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> > index 8e6d866..900da68 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> > @@ -758,7 +758,14 @@ static acpi_status
> > __acpi_os_execute(acpi_execute_type type,
> > queue = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
> > (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq);
> > dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
> > - INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> > +
> > + if (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
> > + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> > + else if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
> > + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> > + else
> > + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> > +
> > ret = queue_work(queue, &dpc->work);
> >
> > if (!ret) {
> >
> >
> > Len or Rafael,
> > can you just revert that silly patch?
>
> Hi Yinghai,
>
> Per the following thread, the code seems to be written in this way to
> allocate a separate lock_class_key for each work queue. It should have
> had some comment to explain this, though.
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/12/13/304
The code has evolved since then, however, so that it doesn't make sense
any more.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] Improve container_notify_cb() to support container hot-remove.
On Thursday, November 01, 2012 11:28:25 AM Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Toshi Kani wrote:
> >
> > Rafael pointed out in my CPU hot-remove patch that
> > acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() was not exported for modules. Looks like
> > you have the same problem here. FYI, I just sent the following patch
> > that exports acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() and acpi_os_hotplug_execute().
> >
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/1/225
>
> acpi_os_hotplug_execute() does not like having good quality yet.
>
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 941) /*
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 942)* We
> can't run hotplug code in keventd_wq/kacpid_wq/kacpid_notify_wq
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 943)*
> because the hotplug code may call driver .remove() functions,
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 944)*
> which invoke flush_scheduled_work/acpi_os_wait_events_complete
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 945)* to
> flush these workqueues.
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 946)*/
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 947) queue
> = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 948)
> (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq);
> 9ac61856 (Bjorn Helgaas 2009-08-31 22:32:10 + 949)
> dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 950)
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 951) if
> (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 952)
> INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 953) else
> if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 954)
> INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 955) else
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 956)
> INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 957)
>
> really don't know why checking queue and call same code in every branch.
>
> from comm:
>
> commit bc73675b99fd9850dd914be01d71af99c5d2a1ae
> Author: Zhang Rui
> Date: Mon Mar 22 15:48:54 2010 +0800
>
> ACPI: fixes a false alarm from lockdep
>
> fixes a false alarm from lockdep, as acpi hotplug workqueue waits other
> workqueues.
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14553
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15521
>
> Original-patch-from: Andrew Morton
> Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li
> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui
> Signed-off-by: Len Brown
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> index 8e6d866..900da68 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> @@ -758,7 +758,14 @@ static acpi_status
> __acpi_os_execute(acpi_execute_type type,
> queue = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
> (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq);
> dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
> - INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> +
> + if (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
> + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> + else if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
> + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> + else
> + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> +
> ret = queue_work(queue, &dpc->work);
>
> if (!ret) {
>
>
> Len or Rafael,
> can you just revert that silly patch?
We're removing this as per:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git;a=commit;h=77f1966ec9763e85e5f1a9202802e90c297b4c21
Thanks,
Rafael
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] Improve container_notify_cb() to support container hot-remove.
On Thu, 2012-11-01 at 11:28 -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Toshi Kani wrote:
> >
> > Rafael pointed out in my CPU hot-remove patch that
> > acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() was not exported for modules. Looks like
> > you have the same problem here. FYI, I just sent the following patch
> > that exports acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() and acpi_os_hotplug_execute().
> >
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/1/225
>
> acpi_os_hotplug_execute() does not like having good quality yet.
>
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 941) /*
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 942)* We
> can't run hotplug code in keventd_wq/kacpid_wq/kacpid_notify_wq
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 943)*
> because the hotplug code may call driver .remove() functions,
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 944)*
> which invoke flush_scheduled_work/acpi_os_wait_events_complete
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 945)* to
> flush these workqueues.
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 946)*/
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 947) queue
> = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
> c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 948)
> (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq);
> 9ac61856 (Bjorn Helgaas 2009-08-31 22:32:10 + 949)
> dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 950)
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 951) if
> (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 952)
> INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 953) else
> if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 954)
> INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 955) else
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 956)
> INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 957)
>
> really don't know why checking queue and call same code in every branch.
>
> from comm:
>
> commit bc73675b99fd9850dd914be01d71af99c5d2a1ae
> Author: Zhang Rui
> Date: Mon Mar 22 15:48:54 2010 +0800
>
> ACPI: fixes a false alarm from lockdep
>
> fixes a false alarm from lockdep, as acpi hotplug workqueue waits other
> workqueues.
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14553
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15521
>
> Original-patch-from: Andrew Morton
> Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li
> Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui
> Signed-off-by: Len Brown
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> index 8e6d866..900da68 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> @@ -758,7 +758,14 @@ static acpi_status
> __acpi_os_execute(acpi_execute_type type,
> queue = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
> (type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq);
> dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
> - INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> +
> + if (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
> + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> + else if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
> + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> + else
> + INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
> +
> ret = queue_work(queue, &dpc->work);
>
> if (!ret) {
>
>
> Len or Rafael,
> can you just revert that silly patch?
Hi Yinghai,
Per the following thread, the code seems to be written in this way to
allocate a separate lock_class_key for each work queue. It should have
had some comment to explain this, though.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/12/13/304
Thanks,
-Toshi
>
> Yinghai
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] Improve container_notify_cb() to support container hot-remove.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Toshi Kani wrote:
>
> Rafael pointed out in my CPU hot-remove patch that
> acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() was not exported for modules. Looks like
> you have the same problem here. FYI, I just sent the following patch
> that exports acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() and acpi_os_hotplug_execute().
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/1/225
acpi_os_hotplug_execute() does not like having good quality yet.
c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 941) /*
c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 942)* We
can't run hotplug code in keventd_wq/kacpid_wq/kacpid_notify_wq
c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 943)*
because the hotplug code may call driver .remove() functions,
c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 944)*
which invoke flush_scheduled_work/acpi_os_wait_events_complete
c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 945)* to
flush these workqueues.
c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 946)*/
c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 947) queue
= hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
c02256be (Zhang Rui 2009-06-23 10:20:29 +0800 948)
(type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq);
9ac61856 (Bjorn Helgaas 2009-08-31 22:32:10 + 949)
dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 950)
bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 951) if
(queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 952)
INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 953) else
if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 954)
INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 955) else
bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 956)
INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
bc73675b (Zhang Rui 2010-03-22 15:48:54 +0800 957)
really don't know why checking queue and call same code in every branch.
from comm:
commit bc73675b99fd9850dd914be01d71af99c5d2a1ae
Author: Zhang Rui
Date: Mon Mar 22 15:48:54 2010 +0800
ACPI: fixes a false alarm from lockdep
fixes a false alarm from lockdep, as acpi hotplug workqueue waits other
workqueues.
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14553
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15521
Original-patch-from: Andrew Morton
Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li
Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui
Signed-off-by: Len Brown
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
index 8e6d866..900da68 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
@@ -758,7 +758,14 @@ static acpi_status
__acpi_os_execute(acpi_execute_type type,
queue = hp ? kacpi_hotplug_wq :
(type == OSL_NOTIFY_HANDLER ? kacpi_notify_wq : kacpid_wq);
dpc->wait = hp ? 1 : 0;
- INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
+
+ if (queue == kacpi_hotplug_wq)
+ INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
+ else if (queue == kacpi_notify_wq)
+ INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
+ else
+ INIT_WORK(&dpc->work, acpi_os_execute_deferred);
+
ret = queue_work(queue, &dpc->work);
if (!ret) {
Len or Rafael,
can you just revert that silly patch?
Yinghai
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] Improve container_notify_cb() to support container hot-remove.
On Wed, 2012-10-31 at 15:27 +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
> This patch introduces a new function container_device_remove() to do
> the container hot-remove job. It works like the following:
>
> 1. call acpi_bus_trim(device, 0) to stop the container device,
>which means to unbind ACPI drivers first before remove devices.
>(This feature is introduced by Lu Yinghai:
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-pci/msg17667.html)
> 2. generate the KOBJ_OFFLINE uevent. (Did I do this correct ?)
> 3. call acpi_bus_hot_remove_device(), which will call acpi_bus_trim(device, 1)
>to remove the container.
>
> This patch is based on Lu Yinghai's work.
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/yinghai/linux-yinghai.git
> for-pci-split-pci-root-hp-2
>
> Signed-off-by: Tang Chen
> ---
> drivers/acpi/container.c | 63 ++---
> 1 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/container.c b/drivers/acpi/container.c
> index a10eee6..4abec98 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/container.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/container.c
> @@ -166,6 +166,32 @@ static int container_device_add(struct acpi_device
> **device, acpi_handle handle)
> return result;
> }
>
> +static int container_device_remove(struct acpi_device *device)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + struct acpi_eject_event *ej_event;
> +
> + /* stop container device at first */
> + ret = acpi_bus_trim(device, 0);
> + pr_debug("acpi_bus_trim stop return %x\n", ret);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + /* send the uevent before remove the device */
> + kobject_uevent(&device->dev.kobj, KOBJ_OFFLINE);
> +
> + ej_event = kmalloc(sizeof(*ej_event), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!ej_event)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + ej_event->device = device;
> + ej_event->event = ACPI_NOTIFY_EJECT_REQUEST;
> +
> + acpi_bus_hot_remove_device(ej_event);
Hi Tang,
Rafael pointed out in my CPU hot-remove patch that
acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() was not exported for modules. Looks like
you have the same problem here. FYI, I just sent the following patch
that exports acpi_bus_hot_remove_device() and acpi_os_hotplug_execute().
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/11/1/225
Thanks,
-Toshi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[PATCH v3 3/3] Improve container_notify_cb() to support container hot-remove.
This patch introduces a new function container_device_remove() to do
the container hot-remove job. It works like the following:
1. call acpi_bus_trim(device, 0) to stop the container device,
which means to unbind ACPI drivers first before remove devices.
(This feature is introduced by Lu Yinghai:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-pci/msg17667.html)
2. generate the KOBJ_OFFLINE uevent. (Did I do this correct ?)
3. call acpi_bus_hot_remove_device(), which will call acpi_bus_trim(device, 1)
to remove the container.
This patch is based on Lu Yinghai's work.
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/yinghai/linux-yinghai.git
for-pci-split-pci-root-hp-2
Signed-off-by: Tang Chen
---
drivers/acpi/container.c | 63 ++---
1 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/container.c b/drivers/acpi/container.c
index a10eee6..4abec98 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/container.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/container.c
@@ -166,6 +166,32 @@ static int container_device_add(struct acpi_device
**device, acpi_handle handle)
return result;
}
+static int container_device_remove(struct acpi_device *device)
+{
+ int ret;
+ struct acpi_eject_event *ej_event;
+
+ /* stop container device at first */
+ ret = acpi_bus_trim(device, 0);
+ pr_debug("acpi_bus_trim stop return %x\n", ret);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ /* send the uevent before remove the device */
+ kobject_uevent(&device->dev.kobj, KOBJ_OFFLINE);
+
+ ej_event = kmalloc(sizeof(*ej_event), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!ej_event)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ ej_event->device = device;
+ ej_event->event = ACPI_NOTIFY_EJECT_REQUEST;
+
+ acpi_bus_hot_remove_device(ej_event);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
/* This function is of type acpi_osd_exec_callback */
static void _container_notify_cb(void *context)
{
@@ -182,6 +208,9 @@ static void _container_notify_cb(void *context)
handle = cb_data->handle;
type = cb_data->type;
+ present = is_device_present(handle);
+ status = acpi_bus_get_device(handle, &device);
+
switch (type) {
case ACPI_NOTIFY_BUS_CHECK:
/* Fall through */
@@ -190,13 +219,16 @@ static void _container_notify_cb(void *context)
(type == ACPI_NOTIFY_BUS_CHECK) ?
"ACPI_NOTIFY_BUS_CHECK" : "ACPI_NOTIFY_DEVICE_CHECK");
- present = is_device_present(handle);
- status = acpi_bus_get_device(handle, &device);
if (!present) {
if (ACPI_SUCCESS(status)) {
/* device exist and this is a remove request */
- device->flags.eject_pending = 1;
- kobject_uevent(&device->dev.kobj, KOBJ_OFFLINE);
+ result = container_device_remove(device);
+ if (result) {
+ dev_warn(&device->dev, "%s: Failed to "
+ "remove container\n",
+ __func__);
+ break;
+ }
goto out;
}
break;
@@ -207,7 +239,9 @@ static void _container_notify_cb(void *context)
result = container_device_add(&device, handle);
if (result) {
- printk(KERN_WARNING "Failed to add container\n");
+ dev_warn(&device->dev,
+ "%s: Failed to add container\n",
+ __func__);
break;
}
@@ -216,12 +250,21 @@ static void _container_notify_cb(void *context)
break;
case ACPI_NOTIFY_EJECT_REQUEST:
- if (!acpi_bus_get_device(handle, &device) && device) {
- device->flags.eject_pending = 1;
- kobject_uevent(&device->dev.kobj, KOBJ_OFFLINE);
- goto out;
+ printk(KERN_WARNING "Container driver received %s event\n",
+ "ACPI_NOTIFY_EJECT_REQUEST");
+
+ if (!present || ACPI_FAILURE(status) || !device)
+ break;
+
+ result = container_device_remove(device);
+ if (result) {
+ dev_warn(&device->dev,
+ "%s: Failed to remove container\n",
+ __func__);
+ break;
}
- break;
+
+ goto out;
default:
/* non-hotplug event; possibly handled by other handler */
--
1.7.1
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body
