From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hanjun Guo Subject: Re: [Linaro-acpi] [RFC part1 PATCH 1/7] ACPI: Make ACPI core running without PCI on ARM64 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 09:52:13 +0800 Message-ID: <52A673CD.6010405@linaro.org> References: <1386088611-2801-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <20131209115050.GA19163@arm.com> <52A5C024.5050702@linaro.org> <201312091735.05014.arnd@arndb.de> <20131209170617.GC30717@srcf.ucam.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20131209170617.GC30717@srcf.ucam.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Matthew Garrett , Arnd Bergmann Cc: Catalin Marinas , Tomasz Nowicki , Mark Rutland , "linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org" , Russell King - ARM Linux , "patches@linaro.org" , Olof Johansson , Linus Walleij , Daniel Lezcano , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Will Deacon , "linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "rob.herring@calxeda.com" , Bjorn Helgaas , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On 2013-12-10 1:06, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 05:35:04PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> Exactly. In particular we don't want people to get the wrong idea about >> where we are heading, so making it possible to use this code on embedded >> systems for me is a reason *not* to take the patch. > > People are trying to deploy ACPI-based embedded x86, and most of the > ACPI/DT integration discussion seems to have been based on the idea that > this is a worthwhile thing to support. If we're not interested in doing > so then we should probably make that a whole kernel decision rather than > a per architecture one. I agree, thanks for this information.