From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A526C433E1 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 20:34:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A093207F5 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 20:34:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728437AbgG1Uep (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:34:45 -0400 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([185.16.172.187]:60680 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728529AbgG1Ueo (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:34:44 -0400 Received: from andrew by vps0.lunn.ch with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1k0WJ3-007LCj-8V; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 22:34:37 +0200 Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 22:34:37 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn To: Sudeep Holla Cc: Jeremy Linton , Calvin Johnson , Russell King - ARM Linux admin , Jon , Cristi Sovaiala , Ioana Ciornei , Andy Shevchenko , Florian Fainelli , Madalin Bucur , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux.cj@gmail.com, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Vikas Singh Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v7 1/6] Documentation: ACPI: DSD: Document MDIO PHY Message-ID: <20200728203437.GB1748118@lunn.ch> References: <20200715090400.4733-1-calvin.johnson@oss.nxp.com> <20200715090400.4733-2-calvin.johnson@oss.nxp.com> <1a031e62-1e87-fdc1-b672-e3ccf3530fda@arm.com> <20200724133931.GF1472201@lunn.ch> <97973095-5458-8ac2-890c-667f4ea6cd0e@arm.com> <20200724191436.GH1594328@lunn.ch> <20200727172136.GC8003@bogus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200727172136.GC8003@bogus> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Hi Everybody So i think it is time to try to bring this discussion to some sort of conclusion. No ACPI maintainer is willing to ACK any of these patches. Nor are they willing to NACK them. ACPI maintainers simply don't want to get involved in making use of ACPI in networking. I personally don't have the knowledge to do ACPI correctly, review patches, point people in the right direction. I suspect the same can be said for the other PHY maintainers. Having said that, there is clearly a wish from vendors to make use of ACPI in the networking subsystem to describe hardware. How do we go forward? For the moment, we will need to NACK all patches adding ACPI support to the PHY subsystem. Vendors who really do want to use ACPI, not device tree, probably need to get involved in standardisation. Vendors need to submit a proposal to UEFI and get it accepted. Developers should try to engage with the ACPI maintainers and see if they can get them involved in networking. Patches with an Acked-by from an ACPI maintainer will be accepted, assuming they fulfil all the other usual requirements. But please don't submit patches until you do have an ACPI maintainer on board. We don't want to spamming the lists with NACKs all the time. Andrew