From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: Timur Tabi <timur@kernel.org>
Cc: Kernel Build Reports Mailman List
<kernel-build-reports@lists.linaro.org>,
Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@codeaurora.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Lina Iyer <ilina@codeaurora.org>,
Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: next/master boot: 265 boots: 17 failed, 184 passed with 64 offline (next-20190730)
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 10:20:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190805092047.GA4739@dell> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e974aa7e-98d4-1594-755b-6f57ab852cd7@kernel.org>
On Thu, 01 Aug 2019, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On 7/31/19 12:58 PM, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
> >
> > static int gpiochip_alloc_valid_mask(struct gpio_chip *gc)
> > {
> > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF_GPIO))
> > gc->need_valid_mask = of_gpio_need_valid_mask(gc);
> > if (!gc->need_valid_mask)
> > return 0;
>
> So this seems wrong on a system with OF and ACPI. It assumes that OF takes
> priority over ACPI if both are enabled, and that's not true in general. If
> anything, it's the other way around.
Device Tree has priority in the Linux Kernel. If the bootloader
provides both (which breaks SBBR and EBBR compliance by the way!),
then the kernel will choose DT.
I guess this is because DT is more fluid (much to the originator's
dismay I should imagine) and can be used to fix broken ACPI tables
which tend to be more of a permanent fixture.
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Linaro Services Technical Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-05 9:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <5d403574.1c69fb81.14163.65d3@mx.google.com>
2019-07-30 12:34 ` next/master boot: 265 boots: 17 failed, 184 passed with 64 offline (next-20190730) Mark Brown
2019-08-02 13:03 ` Neil Armstrong
2019-07-30 13:00 ` Mark Brown
2019-07-30 13:28 ` Mark Brown
2019-07-30 13:41 ` Mark Brown
2019-07-31 8:48 ` Linus Walleij
2019-07-31 10:39 ` Mark Brown
2019-08-05 9:23 ` Lee Jones
2019-07-31 15:13 ` Stephen Boyd
2019-07-31 17:58 ` Jeffrey Hugo
2019-08-01 3:49 ` Timur Tabi
2019-08-01 8:09 ` Linus Walleij
2019-08-01 16:17 ` Jeffrey Hugo
2019-08-02 2:51 ` Timur Tabi
2019-08-03 9:42 ` Linus Walleij
2019-08-12 14:07 ` Jeffrey Hugo
2019-08-14 9:05 ` Linus Walleij
2019-08-05 9:20 ` Lee Jones [this message]
2019-07-31 22:40 ` Linus Walleij
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=20190805092047.GA4739@dell \
--to=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=ilina@codeaurora.org \
--cc=jhugo@codeaurora.org \
--cc=kernel-build-reports@lists.linaro.org \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=swboyd@chromium.org \
--cc=timur@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).