From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Graeme Gregory <gg@slimlogic.co.uk>,
Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com>, Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@intel.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
Robert Moore <robert.moore@intel.com>,
"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
Robert Richter <rric@kernel.org>,
Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Subject: Re: [Linaro-acpi] [RFC PATCH for Juno 1/2] net: smsc911x add support for probing from ACPI
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 17:26:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140902162606.GX29327@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4816592.tj3on6vUaC@wuerfel>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1229 bytes --]
On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 03:42:53PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The way I recall the discussion, most people were on one extreme
> side of the discussion or the other:
> a) We should use _DSD for ARM64 servers to maximize code reuse with
> DT-enabled drivers, work around the slow UEFI standardization process,
> remain in control of the actual bindings, and avoid the need for
> endless per-ID platform-data definitions in drivers.
> b) We should never use _DSD at all, since doing that would have no
> advantage over using DT directly, and we should force every device
> manufacturer to specify their bindings in an official ACPI document
> to prevent random incompatible bindings from being established.
> Any device that shows up in servers should not need arbitrary detailed
> properties anyway, as the details are supposed to be hidden in AML.
> I can understand the reasons for both approaches, and I find it hard
> to say either one is invalid. However, the worst possible outcome in
> my opinion would be having to support a mix of the two.
Right, and the x86 embedded folks are going full steam ahead with _DSD
regardless so it seems there will be some systems out there using it
even if they're not ARM servers.
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-02 16:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-01 15:05 [RFC PATCH for Juno 0/2] Drivers for Juno to boot from ACPI Hanjun Guo
2014-09-01 15:06 ` [RFC PATCH for Juno 1/2] net: smsc911x add support for probing " Hanjun Guo
2014-09-01 15:17 ` [Linaro-acpi] " Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-01 15:28 ` Graeme Gregory
2014-09-01 15:32 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-01 16:53 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-09-01 16:58 ` Mark Brown
2014-09-01 17:08 ` Sudeep Holla
2014-09-01 17:14 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-09-01 17:33 ` Sudeep Holla
2014-09-01 17:03 ` Graeme Gregory
2014-09-15 4:08 ` Grant Likely
2014-09-15 9:24 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-09-01 17:04 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-09-01 17:11 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-01 17:27 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-09-01 17:32 ` Graeme Gregory
2014-09-01 18:11 ` Mark Brown
2014-09-02 13:26 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-09-02 13:42 ` [Linaro-acpi] " Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-02 16:26 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2014-09-02 23:00 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2014-09-03 15:09 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-09 6:51 ` Jon Masters
2014-09-15 4:14 ` Grant Likely
2014-09-15 16:12 ` Mark Brown
2014-09-01 15:06 ` [RFC PATCH for Juno 2/2] tty: SBSA compatible UART Hanjun Guo
2014-09-01 15:26 ` Mark Brown
2014-09-01 17:12 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-09-01 17:18 ` Graeme Gregory
2014-09-01 17:29 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-09-01 15:29 ` [RFC PATCH for Juno 0/2] Drivers for Juno to boot from ACPI Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-09 6:55 ` Jon Masters
2014-09-09 10:55 ` Arnd Bergmann
2014-09-09 14:13 ` Jon Masters
2014-09-15 22:57 ` Grant Likely
2014-09-15 23:00 ` Jon Masters
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140902162606.GX29327@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=Liviu.Dudau@arm.com \
--cc=Marc.Zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=Will.Deacon@arm.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=gg@slimlogic.co.uk \
--cc=jason@lakedaemon.net \
--cc=linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lv.zheng@intel.com \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=robert.moore@intel.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=rric@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox