> > > I thought about that, but actually there's no guarantee that the > > > handle will be valid after _EJ0 as far as I can say. So the race > > > condition is going to be there anyway and using struct acpi_device > > > just makes it easier to avoid it. > > > > In theory, yes, a stale handle could be a problem, if _EJ0 performs > > unload table and if ACPICA frees up its internal data structure > > pointed by the handle as a result. But we should not see such issue > > now since we do not support dynamic ACPI namespace yet. > > I'm waiting for information from Bob about that. If we can assume ACPI > handles to be always valid, that will simplify things quite a bit.
If a table is unloaded, all the namespace nodes for that table are removed from the namespace, and thus any ACPI_HANDLE pointers go stale and invalid. Bob
