On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 09:12:49AM -0500, Aaron Durbin wrote:

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Aaron Durbin [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 2:15 AM, Mika Westerberg
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:45:30AM -0500, Aaron Durbin wrote:

quoted

Was anyone able to take a look into a solution for the current
problem?  Again, please feel free to ask if anyone would like help
testing potential solutions.

Below is one proposal for fixing the issue. It is just a prototype and
I'm not sure if it takes everything needed into account. Would you be
able to try it out and let us know if it works for you?

Yes. I'll give it a go. I'm traveling this week so it won't likely be
til early next week. Thanks for the proposed fix. I'll report back on
my findings.

Sorry for the late response. I tried the patch and it works with ACPI
devices in a hierarchy below PCI devices. I didn't have any ACPI
drivers probed but I was able to hang 2 ACPI devices off of a BAR that
had a driver for the PCI device without any resource conflicts
(snippet from /proc/iomem):

    c2a43000-c2a43fff : 0000:00:1b.0
      c2a43000-c2a437ff : GOOG1234:00
      c2a43800-c2a43fff : GOOG1235:00

Thanks for testing.

One observation that I don't think matters much, but I wanted to write
it down in case anyone pulls this thread up again. In the case of
finding the parent resource, the ACPI devcie's resources won't show up
in the resource tree until the pci parent devices' resources are
inserted.

Right, that's expected as the parent PCI device resources will be
allocated a bit later when pcibios_resource_survey_bus() is called.

Rafael, Bjorn,

What do you think? Should I clean up the code and send it out as a
formal patch?