From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 12:25:13 +0100
Subject: Additional ACPI requirements
In-Reply-To: <5720341F.3040702@redhat.com>
References: <5720341F.3040702@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20160427112513.GC12598@leverpostej>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 11:38:07PM -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> 
> There are a few requirements that I would like to ensure are documented
> in various revised documentation. I'm curious to know whether you'd like
> the current in-kernel documentation to include things at the level of
> "GICv3 use requires that every processor have a Processor Device in the
> DSDT". Is that too much detail for the kernel documentation?

If this is about catching oversights and mistakes (as seems to be the
case for the example), having {boot,run}time checks in the kernel is
much more likely to have an impact, especially if there is a helpful
diagnostic.

Otherewise, this kind of requirement, if anything, belongs in the ACPI
spec. If it's in the ACPI spec, having it in the kernel is redundant. If
it's not in the ACPI spec, it will be an uphill struggle to convince
people to implement Linux-flavoured ACPI rather than generic, standard
ACPI.

Thanks,
Mark.