From owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org Sun Oct  6 04:44:30 2002
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by castle.jp.FreeBSD.org (8.11.6+3.4W/8.11.3) id g95JiUZ50771;
	Sun, 6 Oct 2002 04:44:30 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org)
Received: from mail-out2.apple.com (mail-out2.apple.com [17.254.0.51])
	by castle.jp.FreeBSD.org (8.11.6+3.4W/8.11.3) with ESMTP/inet id g95JiT350766
	for <acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org>; Sun, 6 Oct 2002 04:44:29 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from msmith@freebsd.org)
Received: from mailgate1.apple.com (A17-128-100-225.apple.com [17.128.100.225])
	by mail-out2.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g95JiRs17587
	for <acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org>; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 12:44:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from scv3.apple.com (scv3.apple.com) by mailgate1.apple.com
 (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.5) with ESMTP id <T5dc0fe70e6118064e13d4@mailgate1.apple.com> for <acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org>;
 Sat, 5 Oct 2002 12:44:19 -0700
Received: from freebsd.org (vpn-scv-x1-43.apple.com [17.219.193.43])
	by scv3.apple.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id g95JiQ303752
	for <acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org>; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 12:44:27 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v546)
From: Michael Smith <msmith@freebsd.org>
To: acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <200210041908.EAA19776@axe-inc.co.jp>
Message-Id: <DAD35618-D89A-11D6-86D5-0050E4660701@freebsd.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.546)
Reply-To: acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
Precedence: list
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 12:44:26 -0700
X-Sequence: acpi-jp 1880
Subject: [acpi-jp 1880] Re: acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
Errors-To: owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
Sender: owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
X-Originator: msmith@freebsd.org
X-Distribute: distribute version 2.1 (Alpha) patchlevel 24e+020902


On Friday, October 4, 2002, at 12:08 PM, Takanori Watanabe wrote:

>>> devices, to route PCI-PCI bus interrupt, to use ATA bus timing 
>>> setting
>>> informations, to handle ACPI PCI hotplug device, and etc.
>>>
>> Yes, however we attach things (and under ACPI it is still more or less
>> expected that you attach things) to the bus that enumerates them.
>>
>> PCI bridges enumerate PCI devices, so PCI devices go under PCI 
>> bridges.
>>
>> Stuff that's enumerated by ACPI ends up under ACPI.
>
> It is true that ACPI namespace sometimes form odd structure, but
> ACPI devices often cannot be identified without
> existing bus enumeration mechanism, especially
> other than ISA-like devices.
>
> So it is meaningful that device tree have nearly same
> layout as ACPI namespace as far as possible.

This is nothing more than a convenience to the debugger; since we
can't guarantee that the ACPI namespace will resemble the device
tree, we shouldn't expect that it does at all.

When it comes to matching devices enumerated by means other than
ACPI with devices in the ACPI namespace, we're talking about PCI
these days and the _ADR resource is adequate as long as the bus
number is correct, and ACPI tells us we can get the bus number
either from _ADR directly or from the device's scope in the ACPI
namespace.

> I don't object some ISA-like devices are direct child of acpi bus.
> It is  more better that ISA bus children is automatically
> child of ACPI-bus children.

Are you suggesting we should have an acpi_isab bus that replaces
the standard isab and hang the "manually" probed ISA devices off
it if there is ACPI in the system?  That works for me.

  = Mike

